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

[LordJohnWhorfin]

IMO, AT&T was banking on merging with T-Mobile in order to get the extra spectrum required in some markets to be able to handle the data growth.

What a crock. The spectrum in question is not usable by the phones they currently sell! The T-Mobile merger was always about eliminating a competitor, consolidating the industry and making it easier to keep the prices high. It was pure anti-competitive, monopolistic behavior.

Spectrum is finite. They can build as many towers as they want, but if there's no available spectrum, those towards can't broadcast.

You're brilliantly demonstrating your complete lack of grasp of the issue.

 

[Blorzoga]

So much for flying under the radar. Now they will throttle EVERYBODY who uses 3gb or more regardless of whether it is overloading the network in their area? That's ***** BS. AT&T's whole premise for throttling in the first place was to alleviate the strain on the network where it was needed. Now apparently it is blatantly screwing its loyal customers who have been sticking with them, albeit because of the unlimited data grandfathering. They really suck.

 

[5aga]

It IS still a carrot to keep you from switching because no other provider offers unlimited plans for new customers, not even AT&T for new customers! You have the privilege of not worrying about overage charges for the same $30 price that new customers pay for 3GB/mo plus overage charges! An arbitrary number of 2GB or less depending on the needs of the network that month was the most unfair part. Now at least you get what other new customers get for $30/mo PLUS YOU DON'T HAVE ANY OVERAGE CHARGES! And if you want to use more data than 3GB you can pay for the $50 5GB plan. And at $10/1GB overage fees that sounds pretty reasonable for a cellphone company. http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/plans/data-plans.jsp

you must work for AT&T.

unfortunately those of us with unlimited data signed contracts with AT&T and nowhere in these contracts does it say that we should be punished or have to switch plans for actually using our "unlimited" data.

 

[tbrinkma]

AT&T's official solution. Option #3.

If you are getting throttled at 3 GB on your unlimited plan, you can choose to switch to our tiered 3 GB data plan.

This will cost you exactly the same, but instead of throttling you, we'll just charge you overage fees!

LOL.

But with the 3GB plan you get to tether. With the 'unlimited' plan, it's not allowed (and never was).

 

[heved]

Why must you watch short clips? Why don't you just use your data for emails. If you did that the network would be even less congested. Dam hogs!!!

Look, he paid for the data, and so he figured he might as well use it. You should complain to AT&T if their services sucks. What people do with the data they paid for is none of your business.

If everyone used their iPhones to watch movies projected on their living room walls our data speeds would indeed be throttled by the congested network, not by AT&T's policies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-L1oqa0Pysg

 

[mores]

WHAT? If the speed is limited, the data is by definition not unlimited.

Well, you're right. Speed is always limited. But even if you had a speed of 5Gb/s, after 30 days you'd still be "limited" to 1,296,000Gb.
I wonder if y'all read your contracts. Even if you're throttled, you're still able to be online, read email and surf the web. They're not cutting you off, just slowing you down.

I agree the top 5% limit is idiotic, but I do think that the throttling after X Gb is legitimate, if you want to have realistic prices.

Also, throttling is better than charging extra.

And how do you go beyond 3Gb on a PHONE or TABLET anyways? Porn?

 

[JohnDoe98]

The entitled outrage here is mind-blowing. I see nothing wrong with throttling above 3GB/month. Everyone else shouldn't have to pay because of the extreme usage of a few. It's still unlimited. God know what you people use all that data for on your phones. Have some common sense and look at he big picture.

Why are you blaming those users for AT&T's mistake of signing up more people onto their networks than the networks can handle? If AT&T can't handle how many clients it has. It should make it so that some of these contracts expire after their are up. Again you are pointing the figure at the wrong person.

 

[tbrinkma]

The LTE part is interesting. When the iPad and iPhone go LTE am I to understand the ceiling will be 5GB before throttling? I think I'd be pretty happy about that but one question: is there anything inherent about LTE that causes data to be used faster? Logically it seems, for example, the data rate of any given steaming video would be constant whether it's being kicked via 3G or 4G.

For most browsing the limiting factor for data usage is how much time you spend reading the page. A faster connection simply reduces the time you spend waiting for the page to load, so doubling your connection speed doesn't necessarily mean you'll be doubling your data usage. (You'll probably increase a little since you'll spend a bit less time waiting, allowing you to do more in the same amount of time, but it's *highly* unlikely to be double.)

 

[aristobrat]

If the network can't handle more users, stop adding them. And AT&T should have known the government would strike that merger down. If they banked on that long term they are idiots.

IMO, by throttling, AT&T is stopping the users that it doesn't think it can handle.

I think part of this is just to spite the FCC for blocking the merger. Watch AT&T let this blow up into an even bigger mess, and then point this at the FCC and say "hey, this is directly a result of you blocking the merger".

 

[LordJohnWhorfin]

And what speed is that?

I sure wasn't able to find it stated on the website.

They did characterize it, vaguely, as "sufficient for email and surfing the web".

It would be nice to know just what speed that is, though.

Again, the whole thing doesn't make much sense from a network-congestion standpoint. Throttling should occur during peak periods to protect the integrity of the network. It certainly would be fair to slow-down the biggest users more than modest users, and to throttle high-bandwidth applications more than low-bandwidth ones.

The rest of the time, it shouldn't matter. If it's the dead of night, why limit anybody?

According to an earlier post in this thread, 220Kbps. Enough for the 128Kbps of most audio streaming, including SiriusXM and Pandora, but not enough for the 330Kbps of Netflix in low quality mode.
Then again that is only early anecdotal evidence and does not reflect a commitment from AT&T. The only thing they seem to be committed to is ripping us off.

And I agree with your throttling strategy, although it seems they may have been doing just that.

 

[JohnDoe98]

If everyone used their iPhones to watch movies projected on their living room walls our data speeds would indeed be throttled by the congested network, not by AT&T's policies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-L1oqa0Pysg

That's nonsense and I don't need to watch a video to realize it. If everyone did that AT&T would have to limit how many clients it can add onto the network. Planes can only carry so many passengers. If the plane is overbooked, you don't blame the travellers for wanting to go on vacation during peak seasons, you blame the airline for overbooking the dam flight.

 

[Lennholm]

If everyone used their iPhones to watch movies projected on their living room walls our data speeds would indeed be throttled by the congested network, not by AT&T's policies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-L1oqa0Pysg

Doesn't clear att of any responsibility. They promised unlimited and got paid for that. If they can't deliver, for whatever reason, they should compensate the customer.
Isn't it funny how the problems with a congested network is somehow magicallly solved if you give them more money for additional data?

---------------

That's nonsense and I don't need to watch a video to realize it. If everyone did that AT&T would have to limit how many clients it can add onto the network. Planes can only carry so many passengers. If the plane is overbooked, you don't blame the travellers for wanting to go on vacation during peak seasons, you blame the airline for overbooking the dam flight.

Spot. On.

 

[GearDriven]

I'm guessing that if t-mobile continues to grow their network and the next iDevices are pentaband there will be a pretty significant leak of users that way. $30/month on tmobile gets you 5GB of data (irregardless of 3g/"4g"), after which you are metered. 100 minutes of talking. unlimited texting.

Verizon has LTE penetration far exceeding AT&T's (I really doubt they will make their 2013 goal based on how far behind they already are). Same price. Yet for $30/month I can add tethering to my unlimited plan on my phone.

I have an unlimited plan not because I am using this in place of my home internet, but because I want to use my plan the way its shown in ads (iCloud, streaming,etc) without having to look over my shoulder and wonder if I am hitting the threshold. 2/3GB plans can be chewed up pretty fast using spotify, google music, or any of the other streaming services if you do not watch it.

Hulu in HD is 2.5 Mbit/second from what I have seen. Which works out to just under 1 GB an hour if my math is right. So as screen resolutions and sizes increase, so will data.

 

[aristobrat]

Why are you blaming those users for AT&T's mistake of signing up more people onto their networks than the networks can handle? If AT&T can't handle how many clients it has. It should make it so that some of these contracts expire after their are up. Again you are pointing the figure at the wrong person.

If the FCC is preventing AT&T from acquiring the spectrum it needs to expand its network, I think there's more than just AT&T you need to be pointing your finger at.

 

[heved]

you must work for AT&T.

unfortunately those of us with unlimited data signed contracts with AT&T and nowhere in these contracts does it say that we should be punished or have to switch plans for actually using our "unlimited" data.

I do not work for AT&T and I was in contact with Matt Spaccarelli (who won the small claims case) last week to ask his help suing them myself.... Until they made the throttling policy change today. I'm satisfied. I'm on my phone for 3 or 4 hours at a time a day minimum and in order to use 3GB of data (which I've only done once in 3 years) I have to be downloading many files with very large file sizes. Cel phone data networks major advantage to cable or dsl networks is that you can be ANYWHERE and access quick internet. It's not designed to serve hi def movies to people in their cars or on the go. I seriously challenge anyone to rack up 3GB of usage in a month without watching movies on their device.

 

[magicbrain]

we won!

CONGRATULATIONS to those who fought attFail, spread the message, signed the petition, filed with FCC etc !!!!!
(charaj, 6coreWhore, crookedcharlie, spyguy, etc)


to all the trolls: sorry, we were wrong - little man, CAN make a change & get the big corp bully to change their policy!

(i still think we should have gotten 5gb before getting throttled, but hey ... according to the new policy, WILL get it when 5 comes out with LTE )

 

[JohnDoe98]

IMO, by throttling, AT&T is stopping the users that it doesn't think it can handle.

Right, by breaking the terms of the contract it has signed with those users. That isn't the way to do it. Others have already explained a much better model as to how to discontinue unlimited plans. After that if your network is still congested, you can lower the amount of data you include in your monthly caps until you have things under control. And to repeat the point again, if network congestion was the issue, throttling during those congested periods, and only those periods, is what is tolerable. And even that can't be a permanent solution. Changing, properly and fairly, the contract is the long term solution.

 

[Bheleu]

Unlimited Data Plan

Tongue in cheek: "Unlimited Data Plan Still Exists" and it exists with no throttling, its called their Limited Data Plan. Once your high speed data cap is hit, it charges you again. You can do this an unlimited number of times, its what makes their limited data plan Unlimited.

Seriously though: For those of you who do not understand how wrong the above is, many of us joined an unlimited data plan so we can keep a budget. Many months we do not ever hit a cap; however, if we ever do it is just wrong to hit us with any amount of a cap. We're paying for 3GB of data each month when we only use less. By throttling us, it is as if we have the right to say well AT&T I am going to throttle the fee I am paying you. I have an unlimited account and I only used 500mb this month, so I am only going to pay you $15 not the $30 we agreed upon. As a matter of fact, 95% of the users do not hit the 3GB cap; therefore, you need to give 95% of us some of that $30 back for every month we did not hit any cap.

The purpose behind unlimited was so we could give and take, we use less some months but we use more others. By removing the capability to sign up for it again on the iPad's, you have forced us down this path of keeping it active continuously. If you ever throttle my iPad, I will goto small claims as well.

 

[aristobrat]

Isn't it funny how the problems with a congested network is somehow magicallly solved if you give them more money for additional data?

You mean because of how most people will refrain from using excess data when they have to pay for it?

 

[spazzcat]

In all honesty, I agree with you. I also, have not read the contract, so there may well be statements in the contract that state that AT&T doesn't guarantee 3G speeds due to network congestion or other factors.

Again, I don't know what's in the contract. I won't assume that the contract agreement is based on what the network is capable of. I'm sure AT&T has decent lawyers that have protected AT&T's interest in the wording of the contract.

As far as the $850 judgement. I don't know the details of that case. Did AT&T even show up? If not, then the guy wins automatically. I'm gonna google that a little after this post.

ADDEDLooks like an AT&T rep did show up at the case. Some regional sales manager.


I think the confusion here is that AT&T calls their HPSA+ network a 4G network. The way the article is worded, 3G/HPSA+ will be throttled at 3GB and 4G/LTE at 5GB. One thing is for certain, iPhones are not 4G/LTE, at best, they are 4G/HPSA+ in AT&T vernacular.

Thanks, that was what I was thinking after I posted.

 

[heved]

Doesn't clear att of any responsibility. They promised unlimited and got paid for that. If they can't deliver, for whatever reason, they should compensate the customer.
Isn't it funny how the problems with a congested network is somehow magicallly solved if you give them more money for additional data?

It is solved actually because they can use your additional data money to maintain more towers, connections, infrastructure.

 

[spazzcat]

Tongue in cheek: "Unlimited Data Plan Still Exists" and it exists with no throttling, its called their Limited Data Plan. Once your high speed data cap is hit, it charges you again. You can do this an unlimited number of times, its what makes their limited data plan Unlimited.

Seriously though: For those of you who do not understand how wrong the above is, many of us joined an unlimited data plan so we can keep a budget. Many months we do not ever hit a cap; however, if we ever do it is just wrong to hit us with any amount of a cap. We're paying for 3GB of data each month when we only use less. By throttling us, it is as if we have the right to say well AT&T I am going to throttle the fee I am paying you. I have an unlimited account and I only used 500mb this month, so I am only going to pay you $15 not the $30 we agreed upon. As a matter of fact, 95% of the users do not hit the 3GB cap; therefore, you need to give 95% of us some of that $30 back for every month we did not hit any cap.

The purpose behind unlimited was so we could give and take, we use less some months but we use more others. By removing the capability to sign up for it again on the iPad's, you have forced us down this path of keeping it active continuously. If you ever throttle my iPad, I will goto small claims as well.

I would change to a limited plan, if they had rollover data...

 

[aristobrat]

Right, by breaking the terms of the contract it has signed with those users. That isn't the way to do it.

I'm not saying they're doing it the right way, but I also don't see where they're breaking the terms of the contract.

Here is the contract, in super easy-to-read English:
http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-ph...sName=Wireless+Customer+Agreement&print=true#

Can you please show me the terms that are being broken?

 

[hbenitez09]

att had announced you would have throttled speeds before the iPhone 4S launched. it was public knowledge when you decided to sign your contract.

So we're supposed to be grateful that they basically have killed our unlimited plans?!

I want out of my ******** contract I signed when I got the 4s. Unlimited data was a primary reason I kept ATT

 

[JohnDoe98]

If the FCC is preventing AT&T from acquiring the spectrum it needs to expand its network, I think there's more than just AT&T you need to be pointing your finger at.

This thread isn't about the FCC. It is about AT&T throttling users. If AT&T was innocent, and couldn't make more profits because they couldn't gain more clients, due to spectrum issues, then we could complain to government that they are stopping jobs from being created in sectors where there is demand.

The problem is, we can't trust AT&T with the spectrum as it is. I'm certainly not in favor of giving them more of it.