Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Recently when upgrading my wife to an iPhone AT&T decided to get rid of her 200/text/mo plan—without telling us. They said they are doing this to all customers when they upgrade. Our only option is to upgrade to their $30/mo unlimited texting plan. My texting plan will be erased too when I get the iPhone 5 this summer. They told me that.

Now add this throttling to the mix on my unlimited plan? Bugger off AT&T!

The iPhone 5 will likely have 4G. Verizon has much better 4G coverage and there are rumors of family data plans. If I could get a 4G plan that covers 5GB between my wife and I for $50/mo I'd be thrilled.

I don't care about ETFs. They've broken their contract with me. It's over when the iPhone 5 comes out!
 
My prediction is sometime this year Google will file to buy T-Mobile.

G-Mobile anyone?

I know you're talking about Google buying T-Mobile USA, but here me out on this. If Apple honestly wanted to roll out a network now money would not be a problem. It would be the labor and man power required to do it. Even Steve Jobs had pondered on the thought of operating a MVNO or even an independent network back in '04 when the iPhone only existed on paper. Although back then Apple had neither the resources or cash. Therefor as we can clearly see now they turned towards the already operating carriers. It was in the biography I'm pretty sure.
 
I understand it to work like this. Each cell is allocated a certain amount of backhaul bandwidth. Monthly costs to maintain each cell site are essentially fixed, regardless of utilization. This is similar to having ethernet in your home; the cost of keeping your switch running stays the same, regardless of how much you use it, or if it is 10baseT or gigabit ethernet.

It appears to me that tiered pricing should be used to assign traffic priority during congested periods, not to set monthly limits on data volume.

The current pricing tries to gets you thinking that data volume has value, and the carriers are not "dumb pipes".

But they should be dumb pipes. This is one of the things that has driven the growth of the internet. How many people would have signed up for netflix streaming if they had to worry about how much data they were using. Would iTunes have been as successful if you could only download so many songs before your internet went down or slowed to a crawl.
 
AT&T Mobile user here

And I get this txt msg every month since last fall. and yes they do throttle me. Guess I like streaming too much.

Fact is there data network sucks and if you took away the overpaid salaries and put it into the infrastructure there'd be allot less complaints about dropped calls and pitiful data

Just the facts
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

8CoreWhore said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)



Yes. Because the loss of all-you-can-eat data is comparable to the holocaust. Well said.

But the principle is exactly the same. Just because that saying was used for a terrible crime doesn't mean that saying is now forbidden to be used forever.

No, but it does make it trite and dilutes the meaning and power of the poem that was hijacked
 
At&t are a bunch of G-Damn ******s. I hate them... but the competition isn't much better...

I hate all the US mobile companies actually, behind on the technology (compared to a few European companies) behind on the latest phones, borderline unethical business practice and dishonest "contracts" with their customers.

Wish the FCC would get off of their arses and actually do something besides try to fine entertainers.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

southernpaws said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

8CoreWhore said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)



Yes. Because the loss of all-you-can-eat data is comparable to the holocaust. Well said.

But the principle is exactly the same. Just because that saying was used for a terrible crime doesn't mean that saying is now forbidden to be used forever.

No, but it does make it trite and dilutes the meaning and power of the poem that was hijacked

Yes it does. And there is no call for it. They can make their argument another way.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

gorskiegangsta said:
southernpaws said:
Yes. Because the loss of all-you-can-eat data is comparable to the holocaust. Well said.

Way to completely miss the point. The quote that post was based on wasn't about the Holocaust, it was about the spread of oppression.

It was so effectively used during the holocaust it became historically linked. But way to nitpick.

I didn't miss the point. If you're trying to mobilize people to action, you might be better served by invoking a more applicable situation. People are hijacking one of the most powerful poems ever and using it to advocate everything from this to the lack of reduced fat peanut butter in stores. It's downright lazy.

Oppression. Seriously?
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

southernpaws said:
gorskiegangsta said:
southernpaws said:
Yes. Because the loss of all-you-can-eat data is comparable to the holocaust. Well said.

Way to completely miss the point. The quote that post was based on wasn't about the Holocaust, it was about the spread of oppression.

I didn't miss the point. If you're trying to mobilize people to action, you might be better served by invoking a more applicable situation. People are hijacking one of the most powerful poems ever and using it to advocate everything from this to the lack of reduced fat peanut butter in stores. It's downright lazy.

Oppression. Seriously?

I agree. It's wrong, and all using it would ever do is diminish your argument and make you look bad. I agree with their argument, but this is not the way to make it.
 
Got this txt this morning too at 2.1gb for the month. I'll likely cancel my service, sell phone on ebay and switch to Verizon before I continue giving AT&T any more of my money.
 
Stop waiting for a lawyer to initiate this!

It's only a matter of time before we're all affected by AT&T's throttling.

Will one of you who have received a throttle notice please get on the phone and find an attorney who's looking for a class action suit?
 
I'm on unlimited, so I'm one of the hated ones. Usually end up around 2 gigs...never received a text.

Wonder how long it will take for someone to sue AT&T demanding a manifest of user's data usage (averages). It's pretty ridiculous how they charge $30 for 3 gigs, yet are threatening users with just over 2 gigs of use for being in the "top 5%."

How about AT&T being a bit more transparent about what's considered "excessive" use? Is it burning through 2 gigs in 4 days or using 12 gigs over 30 days?

I smell an opportunity for a shady lawyer to open a high-profile case, IMO. This moving top 5% target is awfully annoying. Just be transparent AT&T and don't bitch if your $30 users are using $20 worth of data...especially when their contract says unlimited. At least T-Mobile states you will be throttled after 5 gigs. I can live with that and be responsible with my data usage.

God I hate the US' cell carriers. They all have varying degrees of shittiness and it's only going to get worse.
 
It's only a matter of time before we're all affected by AT&T's throttling.

Will one of you who have received a throttle notice please get on the phone and find an attorney who's looking for a class action suit?

Why? You're still getting what you paid for and that is unlimited data. Doesn't mean it has to be all of the same speed.

----------

sounds like time for a class action lawsuit.

2gb is NOT unlimited.

You're not capped at 2GB, you're throttled at 2GB. Know the difference please.
 
Why? You're still getting what you paid for and that is unlimited data. Doesn't mean it has to be all of the same speed.

----------



You're not capped at 2GB, you're throttled at 2GB. Know the difference please.

It's unreasonable because you bought the service based on the premise that you would have unlimited 3g, not limited 3g and unlimited edge. you at&t apologists make me sick.
 
Why? You're still getting what you paid for and that is unlimited data. Doesn't mean it has to be all of the same speed.

Stop saying that. It is limited. There is no other way to define it. The penalty for going over the limit may not be the same as on the tiered plan (overage charges) but their is a penalty for going over a limit. Slower internet speed. It is still a limit. Stop trying to say it isn't.
 
It's unreasonable because you bought the service based on the premise that you would have unlimited 3g, not limited 3g and unlimited edge. you at&t apologists make me sick.

So when LTE rolls out, you're saying that all unlimited data users should only have 3G? Since that's what was offered when they signed up?
 
Class action suit with an immediate injunction pending outcome, with the suggested damages being reallowance to at least 10GB, not quite unlimited, and a cash settlement for the differential between what is throttled and what the top 1% users use times the total subscribed users times the plan duration with all entitled renewals factored in.

The filing alone may get some action and if not, cool!

Any lawyer will take this one on contingency.

What did I just read???

1) Why would the court grant an emergency injunction?
2) How is your damage "being reallowance to at least 10gb?" Do you mean relief not damages? I'm not even sure how you'd ask for that.
3) A cash settlement? In your fantasy world, the court granted injunctive relief so there are no ascertainable damages.

No lawyer is going to take anything on contingency for you.
 
Stop saying that. It is limited. There is no other way to define it. The penalty for going over the limit may not be the same as on the tiered plan (overage charges) but their is a penalty for going over a limit. Slower internet speed. It is still a limit. Stop trying to say it isn't.

Get a dictionary. Stop whining.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

littyboy said:
Stop saying that. It is limited. There is no other way to define it. The penalty for going over the limit may not be the same as on the tiered plan (overage charges) but their is a penalty for going over a limit. Slower internet speed. It is still a limit. Stop trying to say it isn't.

Get a dictionary. Stop whining.

lim·it
[lim-it]
- noun 1. the farthest extent; boundary - verb (used with object) 2. to fix within limits

Very helpful
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.