AT&T Revamps Throttling Policy, Only Slows Unlimited Users above 3GB/Month

[dynaxo]

Ows now!!

I am the 95% and I for one don't think enough is being done. I think those in the 5% have been hogging all the bandwidth for way too many months and they have way to much; they have NetFlix, probably watch streaming sports, listen to Spotify, who knows what other apps these greedy people use (and we are the lower and middle tier users who pay for the ability for them to use those luxuries!!)...I think once those pipe pigs get to 1GB, they should be limited to something like 14.4kb speeds, and then the leftover bandwidth gets spread to the rest of us or they should have to pay for my NetFlix so that I too can be greedy...or something like that, I don't know, but I do know it's totally unfair. Join me in OWS (Occupy Wireless Spectrum) and demand change NOW!!

 

[notabadname]

Breaking News, the Unlimited Users are using more data than the tiered plan users.

Who'd a thunk it

 

[ABernardoJr]

Why are you people mad? Are you seriously going to use more than 3GB of data a month? Do you have to stream that much music and video? Are you ever at home to do that instead or use Wifi? It's pretty messed up yeah, but some people abuse the system. I'd rather have Unlimited and be throttled at 3GB because at least I'd have a safe mind that they would charge for overage compared to them whopping a $10 fee on the bill.

Geez, you guys must be heavy data suckers.

Wasn't a primary issue with this throttling thing about someone getting throttled for < 3 GB of usage? That's not exactly an unfair use of the data, it's not like someone is mad that they got throttled for 15+ GB or something.

 

[Pumapayam]

The "throttled" speed seems to be a bit higher than it used to be. Before it was almost unusable when throttled. Now it's just bad...usable, but bad.

Neither compares to the unthrottled 3G speeds.

My AT&T iPhone went from 0.30 Mbps a weel ago to 1.7 Mbps today...throttled, same cycle.

I usually get 3.0 Mbps or better.

So, honestly, I am not happy being throttled, but my throttle speeds are now usable, and actually on par with an unthrottled Verizon iPhone.

 

[JohnDoe98]

John, we agree on everything you say...except for this.

The contract does state it and the Supreme Court of the United States has upheld it.

Now, I agree with you that is absolutely GARBAGE to begin with........and IMO should be illegal.

Good to know, thanks for correcting me.

Look it up yourself. It's right there on the AT&T website for anyone to read.

Yeah someone else corrected me on this too, but thanks.

 

[lcs101]

I'm surprised by so many AT&T apologists using the excuse about AT&T not guaranteeing "unlimited speeds". It would be one thing it was like Verizon, were it was due to congestion, but to actually actively throttle somebody when they get to a certain point is not at all unlimited and not what we signed up for.

 

[aross99]

My bigger concern in all of this is what happens when the iPhone has LTE. Are we going to be forced to pay more for an "LTE" data plan - like we did when we went from 2G to 3G data?

I don't want to pay an estimated $50 for 5GB of LTE, when I use less than 1GB of 3G...

I would pay $50 for a 5GB LTE/3G family plan though...

 

[Small White Car]

Do you think that that's a sound argument, that being "restricted" to 3G speeds meant the definition was "broken" in the first place so that AT&T's false definition of unlimited is suddenly validated? I'll say more but I want to verify what you're trying to say first before assuming what you're argument is.

Not at all.

AT&T is suddenly validated?

You're just trying to make up things to argue against now. My post had nothing to do with what AT&T says or does. I'm arguing about the language that WE use here on this board. Whatever we decide on that has nothing to do with AT&T.

 

[iansilv]

Nice! New material change in condition to the original contract! AT&T, yOu have the ********* lawyers. I cannot wait for a class action.

 

[TallManNY]

Most of the places require you to manually sign in to use it. If I am streaming pandora, or listening to my music in the iTunes cloud, I don't want to interrupt it to connect to a Wifi spot, to have to restart the music again when I leave it. I rather just use my allocated 3G data. And just listening to music alone, other than emails and the like, runs up the 3GB limit in no time. Do you know how big iTunes albums typically are? Couple hundred mbs at least.

Hmm, well I load my media at home most of the time while connected to wifi or connected to my computer. But I could see how using pandora for background music through the day while walking around would use a lot of cell data.

 

[AbSoluTc]

Called AT&T a little pissed about this. Have 2 unlimited plans. Neither have gone over 500mb if that. So I asked them to give me the 5gig tethering plan for $40 a month and they would credit me the difference for a year @ $120. So they credited me $135 dollars and I am no on the 5 gig tethering plan.

 

[ABernardoJr]

Not at all.

AT&T is suddenly validated?

You're just trying to make up things to argue against now. My post had nothing to do with what AT&T says or does. I'm arguing about the language that WE use here on this board. Whatever we decide on that has nothing to do with AT&T.

I wasn't really trying to make up anything, your posts seemed to imply that there was a loophole in the definition of unlimited, and I took it as an implied defense for AT&T's own flawed interpretation of "unlimited." I wasn't sure if that was what you were actually saying or not so that's why I said I wasn't going to assume anything more than that.

But even with that said, I still don't see why that interpretation of unlimited is flawed on MR? It's basically a dictionary definition and it does actually carry relevance in this context. Saying it's not "unlimited" because it's "limited" to 3G speeds makes no sense when we're talking about unlimited 3G data in the first place, and the fact that 3G speeds are not arbitrarily limited by anything other than the technology of 3G speeds themselves.

 

[Shrink]

Not exactly the same. With unlimited you can continue to use data after 3GB but at a slower speed (now up to around 256Kbs?), while a tiered user would be charged for more data.

The key is how usable that throttled rate is. From what I read, it seems fairly usable.

Not a big difference I know, but enough that I wouldn't switch to the 3GB plan now...

Point taken...your correction is on the mark.

 

[JForestZ34]

Isn't this a reason for us to be able to cancel our contracts without ETF? They are changing the terms of service...


James

 

[Small White Car]

But even with that said, I still don't see why that interpretation of unlimited is flawed on MR? It's basically a dictionary definition and it does actually carry relevance in this context. Saying it's not "unlimited" because it's "limited" to 3G speeds makes no sense when we're talking about unlimited 3G data in the first place, and the fact that 3G speeds are not arbitrarily limited by anything other than the technology of 3G speeds themselves.

That's the thing, though. There's no such thing as a normal 3G speed.

For a long, long time I often got 1.5 Mbps while many others were getting 3.0. Were they getting twice the unlimited I was?

It just feels weird to say that. Should I have complained about that then? That I was only getting half-unlimited?

I'm not saying AT&T is right, I'm just saying that's a weird argument and I wouldn't make it.

 

[ScubaCinci]

I sitll have the unlimited plan for the iPad. I don't typically exceed 3GB/mo but I'm in agreement with most in that artificial software limits (vs technology/hardware limits) invalidates the "unlimited" portion of the unlimited plan. You can eat as many calories a day as you want but we are only giving you one M&M an hour. WTF?

I wonder how they would feel if I throttled my payments to them?

 

[JohnDoe98]

That's the thing, though.

For a long, long time I often got 1.5 Mbps while many others were getting 3.0. Were they getting twice the unlimited I was?

It just feels weird to say that. Should I have complained about that then? That I was only getting half-unlimited?

I'm not saying AT&T is right, I'm just saying that's a weird argument and I wouldn't make it.

Why were you getting 1.5mbps? Was it because too many people were on the same towers as you? Was it because your device wasn't as fast as theirs? If you were being artificially limited then yes you should have complained. If not, then your 1.5mbps was simply a result of the tech currently available.

 

[ABernardoJr]

That's the thing, though. There's no such thing as a normal 3G speed.

For a long, long time I often got 1.5 Mbps while many others were getting 3.0. Were they getting twice the unlimited I was?

It just feels weird to say that. Should I have complained about that then? That I was only getting half-unlimited?

I'm not saying AT&T is right, I'm just saying that's a weird argument and I wouldn't make it.

I suppose, but the speed of the data is still a variable of the data that has to be considered in addition to the quantity when considering "unlimited" data, especially since AT&T hasn't specifically stated that their view of "unlimited" applies only to quantity and not speed. Since they haven't said that, then speed is very much relevant and many seem to overlook this.

If the 3G speed isn't being arbitrarily slowed down (which is what AT&T does when it throttles), then it's reasonable to say it's still unlimited. But since AT&T is choosing to slow down its data speeds it's definitely not unlimited. That's why getting half the speed of others because of things like region and reception are different than getting a slower speed because of being throttled.

----------

I sitll have the unlimited plan for the iPad. I don't typically exceed 3GB/mo but I'm in agreement with most in that artificial software limits (vs technology/hardware limits) invalidates the "unlimited" portion of the unlimited plan. You can eat as many calories a day as you want but we are only giving you one M&M an hour. WTF?

I wonder how they would feel if I throttled my payments to them?

lol That'd be pretty interesting if all the AT&T customers decided to throttle their payments

 

[bursthead]

Why are you people mad? Are you seriously going to use more than 3GB of data a month? Do you have to stream that much music and video? Are you ever at home to do that instead or use Wifi? It's pretty messed up yeah, but some people abuse the system. I'd rather have Unlimited and be throttled at 3GB because at least I'd have a safe mind that they would charge for overage compared to them whopping a $10 fee on the bill.

Geez, you guys must be heavy data suckers.

It's based off the principle of all of it.. We pay for something shouldn't we be able to get what we pay for? Why do I need to supplement my data usage by going home and using wifi when i'm paying to use as much data as I want on my 3g plan. And why do I need to answer for what I use this data for? If im watching netflix or whatever I should be able to do that. When they decided to not allow tethering for unlimited users, they should of left all of us unlimited users alone. You don't want us to tether so leave us to do whatever we want on our devices.

It's almost like your saying if i'm eating at an all you can eat buffet. I should for the sake of the restaurant go home and eat the food I have there instead of eating what I pay for so I can help the restaurant and the other customers. Or as I reach this so called limit at the buffet I can keep eating , but I can only eat crumbs until the next billing cycle. Why is it my responsibility that I limit myself when I pay for an unlimited plan! Do you not understand what unlimited means?

 

[Small White Car]

Why were you getting 1.5mbps? Was it because too many people were on the same towers as you? Was it because your device wasn't as fast as theirs? If you were being artificially limited then yes you should have complained. If not, then your 1.5mbps was simply a result of the tech currently available.

Exactly. If it was beacause there were too many people around, I shouldn't complain.

If its because they're slowing me down for no reason, I should complain.

This is why I didn't like that dictionary definition of unlimited. It would cover BOTH of those scenarios exactly the same. It sees no difference between them. And if my reaction between them is different I should use a definition that sees then differently.

That's what makes it a bad way of defining it. It doesn't differentiate between these 2 scenarios.

 

[ABernardoJr]

Exactly. If it was beacause there were too many people around, I shouldn't complain.

If its because they're slowing me down for no reason, I should complain.

This is why I didn't like that dictionary definition of unlimited. It would cover BOTH of those scenarios exactly the same. It sees no difference between them.

That's what makes it a bad way of defining it. It doesn't differentiate between these 2 scenarios.

To be fair to the person who posted the dictionary definitions I thought it was implied that the definition was being applied under the relevant circumstances of being throttled...

 

[Small White Car]

To be fair to the person who posted the dictionary definitions I thought it was implied that the definition was being applied under the relevant circumstances of being throttled...

But that's my point. I didn't like the argument because it covers everything and we have to just guess that he meant what you're saying you inferred

I didn't mean to say it's 100% wrong, just that I didn't like it. This is why...it's sloppy and forces you to guess at the true meaning.

It'd be like me saying "I don't like computers with menus and folders" when what I mean is "I don't like PCs."

Sure...that's absolutely correct. But it's confusing when you find I mean I like Macs.

 

[djstile]

Has anyone who has been throttled attempted to just cancel their contract without paying an ETF? If the terms of your contract were "Unlimited Data" and they throttle that, they have voided the spirit of their own contract.

 

[StefSSU]

To me it seems as though some of you are destined for lawsuits. You are stuck on the unlimited verbiage, sure it was used when you bought your data plan and should stick.

Looked at another way, most of us have heard that the biggest data hogs fall into the smallest percentile eg: 5%. This to me is a blatant example of data hogs abusing the infrastructure at its finest.

It has long been unthinkable that a person would expect extra minutes for free if they went over their voice plan so why should data be any different?

In today's world you get what you pay for, and I don't think a company with major assets and infrastructures to worry about is asking much by throttling.

Yet those who are hung up on the literal interpretation of "unlimited" are destined for their day in court.

Greed is a deadly sin remember.

Greed? While I understand your point of view, it's irrelevant what you think is excessive. People aren't angry about being throttled so much as they're angry that it is happening on a service that was originally advertised as "unlimited", which naturally gives the impression of without restrictions.

If I sold you a car with an "unlimited" range, you'd be pretty happy right? What if I later began slowing the car down to unacceptable speeds at (and before this, under) ranges that other cars can easily make, while still referring to it as an unlimited range? And if you were unhappy with these changes, you'd have to pay me extra just for the privilege of not using that car anymore, so you could buy one from another company. If you think that's acceptable then you've got a very different opinion of morals compared to the majority of us.

DISCLAIMER: I do not live in the US, and as such don't use any cellular services there, and am not affected by this throttling.

 

[chakraj]

Isn't this a reason for us to be able to cancel our contracts without ETF? They are changing the terms of service...


James

Yes, they are making a material change in the contract conditions.