Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Nunyabinez

macrumors 68000
Apr 27, 2010
1,758
2,230
Provo, UT
The average American is sorely lacking in knowledge of basic macro and microeconomic principles.

Since you have chosen to criticize my nation, let me "school" you a little. I signed a contract with AT&T in which they promised that they would give me all the data that I wanted if I would pay them $30. I have kept my end of the contract. Then AT&T said "Oh, we didn't think about the fact that technology would increase the amount of data that people would use. We would don't want to keep our end of the agreement." They knew that if the forced you off the contract they would get sued, so they tried things like, "if you make any change to your plan you lose your unlimited" or, throttling which I believe is illegal. Imagine what would have happened if I said "hey, when I agreed to $30 a month I didn't realize that I was going to lose my job, so I only want to pay you $10. I have a contract with AT&T. I have kept my end. They keep trying to change the rules because they made a ****** bargain. I know this is off topic a little, but please take your condescending foreign attitude and piss off.
 

charlituna

macrumors G3
Jun 11, 2008
9,636
816
Los Angeles, CA
So what are the chances of AT&T actually giving people FaceTime who are not on the new shared data plans?

if this complaint is successful then 100%. if not, zero.

ATT doesn't offer a video chatting service so under the rules cited they could end up free and clear on this charge. Sucks yes, but very possible. Skype got their free pass because of the SMS alternative and the voice calling alternative. the whole Video thing was just a tag along.

This is not to say that it isn't tacky. If ATT wants to drop unlimited plans then they should just do it. Pull a Verizon and end the grandfathering if you get a subsidy phone. Drop it totally for iPads, after all you are under no contract so ATT never promised not to change terms etc. The only reason for making folks go to the site etc is to clearly spell out that FaceTime over cellular will use a ton of data and you can't cry foul no matter how high your bill goes. Make users sign that they understand this and then the service will be active. But that's it.
 

monaarts

macrumors 65816
Jan 16, 2010
1,168
51
Kennesaw, GA
THANK GOD! AT&T doing this is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. If my company didn't use AT&T (and therefor provide me with a free iPhone), I would have changed companies long ago!
 

Attachments

  • death-star-att.jpg
    death-star-att.jpg
    26.6 KB · Views: 520

bretm

macrumors 68000
Apr 12, 2002
1,951
27
AT+T will have to get rid of the grandfathered unlimited plan sooner or later. They probably should have ended it when the iPhone 5 was announced.

Why? They figured out how to make it unusable by throttling you at 2 or 3 gigs. That's like one or two movie downloads. Two nights somewhere with no wifi and the rest of your month is wrecked.

I would be happy if they took the iPad method of charging you for data in packets. 2 gigs for $x. 3 gigs for $x. Etc. And DON'T make them expire. Enough with the monthly billing. I want a terabyte. How much? It might last me a lifetime, I don't know.
 

doelcm82

macrumors 68040
Feb 11, 2012
3,737
2,757
Florida, USA
Dammit, if I want to use my grandfathered unlimited data plan to sit on FaceTime 24/7 playing chess with family members who live several states away, that's my prerogative. We should all be allowed to do this. Unlimited and cheap data for everyone! Sure, it might crash the local network in heavy data traffic areas and it might raise the rates of our data plans, but it's a natural right given to all persons at birth.

Image

/s

The average American is sorely lacking in knowledge of basic macro and microeconomic principles.
Why do you illustrate a complaint about Americans with a photo of Veruca Salt?
 

newagemac

macrumors 68020
Mar 31, 2010
2,091
23
i really don't have a problem with them placing restrictions on those with unlimited data caps. I do have issue with them placing limits on people who pay for a fixed amount of data.

It is like a fast food place that sells a cup with free refills, i think they have the right to restrict what you do with those refills. You should not be able to share that cup with 10 people at your table and keep getting refills or just stand there filling it up and dumping it out. But if they sell a 32oz drink with no refills then you should be able to do whatever i want with that 32oz drink.

this.
 

burnout8488

macrumors 6502a
May 8, 2011
575
79
Endwell, NY
WOW. Look who is talking. Apple is the biggest offender of this... Starting with the iphone. Following with the charging port. Apple is planning to make $100,000,000 in the first year from charging people for the updated plug...

Greed at its finest.

So... you wanted Apple to use the old 30-pin connector for the rest of eternity?

How would YOU have updated to a new charging port standard?
 

charlituna

macrumors G3
Jun 11, 2008
9,636
816
Los Angeles, CA
AT&T official argument is that they can do this because it is a stock app and not a downloaded app?


Nope, their argument is that they don't offer a video chatting service and therefore this is competing with nothing of theirs and thus the rule doesn't apply. And unfortunately for this complaint, they will likely win the fight with that argument
 

samson533

macrumors newbie
Sep 18, 2012
25
0
Wow, Samson, first - calm down, second - AT&T presents unlimited data as a risk, with great benefits. They offered it to people in an effort to entice consumers to choose AT&T. Then, after enticing us to select them as a service provider, they changed the rules. That's what's upsetting. No, we don't expect AT&T to lose money, but think about what you've said. We apparently "expect businesses to operate at a loss to give [us] the service [we] think we deserve." How are they losing anything? It costs them no more to offer us this data (yes, it may slow down the provided service, but they won't be operating at a loss if they were to provide it). We fulfilled our part of the bargain - we left another company, came to AT&T and paid for unlimited data. They won't be fulfilling their part of the bargain - providing unlimited data.

I don't object to AT&T throttling me (it's never happened to me). I don't object to them not allowing Face time over cellular (It would be nice, but not having it won't kill me). What I would object to is losing unlimited data. I really enjoy the fact that I don't have to stop and think before I look something up, or download a file, or listen to a song.

I get what you are saying. I have a problem with people going to regulators to force a company to provide a service that they no longer wish to provide. Obviously AT&T wants out of the unlimited data space. For what ever reason, it bogs down there system, costs too much, they make more of a profit charging a different way. Whatever the reason, they want out. They should be free to do so.

AT&T offered unlimited plans back in a very different technological market. The bargain they offered its customers wasn't unlimited data w/ netflix, hulu, pandora, facetime, or any other data hog. But things change. And in current market conditions, they say no. That's ok, let them.
 

b33g33

macrumors member
Jun 1, 2012
31
0
What I sent AT&T after they reached out to me because I complained to the FCC:


I emailed you yesterday, did it not go through? Regardless, I'm trying to figure out how this does not break with the principles of net neutrality? From everything I have gathered thus far, your plan is to block my access to and usage of specific data that is both legal and reasonable--unless I choose to pay more for less data on a different plan. I do not pay AT&T for specific content, I pay for access to that content. As a wireless provider, your responsibility is to provide access to data in exchange for a fee; by forcing me into a plan with less data for a higher price, is inherently forcing me to pay more for a service that sends and receives data packets just as Skype, Netflix, Hulu, Facebook and other apps do. A bit is a bit is a bit. To differentiate between them and charge more (inherent in the forced plan migration) for one set of 1's and 0's as opposed to any other set of 1's and 0's is a breach of net neutrality. I pay for the 1's and 0's, not what they translate to. But lets take a step back for a moment and look at your actions in a different industry:

Say my car is in the shop, and my only option is to use a taxi service. On Monday, I call them up ask them to take me to the grocery store, so they come and pick me up in a Toyota Prius. That's cool, I don't mind being seen in one--they save the environment and what not. Tuesday comes around, and I call the taxi service, here's the conversation I have:
Me: Hey, I'm the guy you took to the grocery store yesterday, could you pick me up? I need a ride today.
Taxi service: Oh, well great to hear from you! Sure we'd love to do that--we'll send one of our taxis right on over! Where are you going to?
Me: To the airport.
Taxi service: You're aware that will cost more money, right?
Me: That makes sense--I figured having the taxi take me farther would cost me a little bit more.
Taxi service: No sir, apparently you don't understand. It will cost more because you have to take a different vehicle to go to the airport.
Me: Why?
Taxi service: Oh, well typically, people going to the airport don't go by themselves, so typically you need the extra seating room, and typically people going to the airport need more room for their luggage, and the Lincoln TownCar has a bigger trunk than the Prius.
Me: Oh, that's not necessary, I'm going by myself and only taking a small carry-on.
Taxi service: You don't understand, if you're going to the airport, you have to take the Lincoln TownCar.
Me: But I don't need it, the Prius will do just fine. Is it really necessary for me to take the TownCar?
Taxi service: Yes.
Me: But I don't need it, and since this is a technicality on your part, can you just charge me the regular Prius rate?
Taxi service: I'm sorry I can't provide you the Prius service rate if you are going to use the TownCar.
Me: But I don't need the TownCar...?
Taxi service: Oh, so you're not going to the airport, then?
Me: No, I'm still going to the airport, I just don't need the TownCar.
Taxi service: Well, if you're going to the airport, then you need the TownCar.

You see, I understand that I have to pay to use services, and if I use more of them, I should have to pay more. What doesn't make sense is why I should have to pay an additional fee for something simply because of the way I'm using it. If I don't need all the seating and trunk space to go to the airport, I shouldn't have to pay more for it when their is a simpler, more affordable alternative available to me. But say I need to go with a friend to the home improvement store, and I need a saw horse; I call up the taxi service and pay for the TownCar (you won't believe how big the trunks are). I needed the space, and operating a TownCar is more expensive than a Prius so it will most likely cost more to use. It would be silly for a taxi to charge me more based solely on where I was going to and not on how long it took me to get to my destination.


Back to the real world. You are implementing a policy of data discrimination and taking an emphatic position against the principles of net neutrality. Using "legalese" to wiggle your way out of a situation to justify forcing customers to purchase an inferior product at a higher price is inexcusable. Justifying the decision by saying that you are forcing people to use the Mobile Share Plan in order to "[monitor] the impact the upgrade to this popular preloaded app has on our mobile broadband network, and customers, too, will be in a learning mode as to exactly how much data FaceTime consumes on those usage-based plans," is a cop-out. Limiting this feature to this group of customers for monitoring implies that it will be a small user-base. We both know that it will be a small user-base because people don't want the plan, because they don't want to pay for features they don't need, in order to to get less data.

Your slogan is "Rethink possible," and your policies lead me to believe that less is possible.


~JuBe

P.S. Here's a deleted scene:

Me: I don't understand why I need to pay for the TownCar to go to the airport.
Taxi service: Sir, if I can be honest with you--and this stays between you and me, but if we don't require you to use the Lincoln TownCar to get to the airport, then people would never use the TownCar service.
Me: So by cutting options, you can force people into plans that make you more money?
Taxi service: Bingo! Oh--the higher-ups are coming! (in a scripted voice) Oh, no sir! The Lincoln TownCar really will serve your needs better!

This may be the best thing I've read on MacRumors boards ever.

While we're talking about this nonsense, lets discuss SMS charges. If you don't mind, I will borrow your very creative and apt conceit with the Taxi service.

Me: I noticed that you had a surcharge for me sitting in the backseat of the Prius. Can you please explain what that was?
TS: Yes, we consider providing backseats to be above and beyond the transportation fee involved in our basic charge. If you had sat in the passenger seat, there would be no charge.
Me: Don't backseats come standard on the Prius? You didn't have to pay extra to install them or anything right? Why would you charge extra for that?
TS: It is our standard policy to charge for backseats. If you would like to sit in the back in the future, you may purchase one of our many backseat plans. Depending on how often you like to do this, we have a 200x plan for $5/month, a 500x/month plan for $10 or unlimited backseat usage for only $20/Month. You also have the choice of paying $0.10/use as you did yesterday. However, I recommend signing up for a plan because it's much cheaper if you are a backseat fan.
Me: I'm getting a bicycle.
 

Tangoftw

macrumors newbie
Sep 13, 2012
4
0
Here is a quote
AT&T representatives didn't immediately respond to a request for comments, but Bob Quinn, the company's senior vice president for federal regulatory affairs, defended the company's decision in an August blog post. Quinn argued the net neutrality rules apply only to downloaded apps, not ones preloaded on mobile devices.

Simple solution have FaceTime be a downloaded app and then AT&T cannot block it
 

Intarweb

macrumors 6502a
May 30, 2007
561
0
I would've thought throttling would've fallen into that boat as well. I guess it doesn't say unlimited speed. Do they throttle the data throughput of voice calls too? Probably needs very little bandwidth for voice calls.

Throttling doesn't because it doesn't discriminate where the data comes from or goes.
 

dandy1117

macrumors regular
Sep 18, 2012
127
302
Has anyone actually done the arithmetic before criticizing AT&T?

It seems to me that for people with 3G iPads, that the mobile shared plans could offer significant savings. To add an iPad to a shared account is only $10 and unlike the previous $15 250MB plan, you are not limited per device. So, in theory, you could use as much mobile data for your iPad as is in your shared data tier. (Not to mention that for people with WiFi iPads, mobile share data plans also make sense since, on AT&T, mobile hotspot is included on all devices!)

I think that had AT&T not required a switch to mobile share plan, most customers would have opted for it anyway since it would have represented a better value. So not quite sure why they made that choice, but also not sure why people seem to assume it is a move to gauge customers either.
 

AlligatorBloodz

macrumors regular
Oct 13, 2010
107
0
I have a question regarding this policy. The mobile share plan actually would save my family money. However, if I were to FaceTime with someone on the same data share plan, does that mean we both get docked data? I understand if that is the case, but it would seem unfair since my upload data for FaceTime is my family members download. Anyone know how this works?
 

charlituna

macrumors G3
Jun 11, 2008
9,636
816
Los Angeles, CA
Starting with the iphone. Following with the charging port. Apple is planning to make $100,000,000 in the first year from charging people for the updated plug...

What charge? Apple puts a charging/connection cable in every iphone box for free.

The only charge is for an adapter to use an old speaker etc with the new iphone. But Apple didn't force you to buy that speaker, it's not required for using the iphone. You made that choice on your own. And if the company that made it doesn't want to contact Apple for permission to make the adapter and give it away to previous buyers that's not Apple's fault either.
 

GSPice

macrumors 68000
Nov 24, 2008
1,632
89
lol if people "switched" as much as they scream they will, AT&T would be singing a different tune. Bottom line, AT&T won't do anything that will make customers leave in droves.
 

bbeagle

macrumors 68040
Oct 19, 2010
3,539
2,972
Buffalo, NY
I have a question regarding this policy. The mobile share plan actually would save my family money. However, if I were to FaceTime with someone on the same data share plan, does that mean we both get docked data? I understand if that is the case, but it would seem unfair since my upload data for FaceTime is my family members download. Anyone know how this works?

BOTH of the lines get charged. If you made a 1gb face-time call, from and to someone in your data share plan, your data share plan would be charged 2gb.

This is exactly the same as in the old plan if you texted another person. Both would be charged 10cents a text (or whatever the plan said). Same with phone calls, but since all of the recent plans offered 'unlimited' AT&T customers, it would in effect, be free.
 

tacobandit

macrumors newbie
Sep 18, 2012
7
0
Since you have chosen to criticize my nation, let me "school" you a little. I signed a contract with AT&T in which they promised that they would give me all the data that I wanted if I would pay them $30. I have kept my end of the contract. Then AT&T said "Oh, we didn't think about the fact that technology would increase the amount of data that people would use. We would don't want to keep our end of the agreement." They knew that if the forced you off the contract they would get sued, so they tried things like, "if you make any change to your plan you lose your unlimited" or, throttling which I believe is illegal. Imagine what would have happened if I said "hey, when I agreed to $30 a month I didn't realize that I was going to lose my job, so I only want to pay you $10. I have a contract with AT&T. I have kept my end. They keep trying to change the rules because they made a ****** bargain. I know this is off topic a little, but please take your condescending foreign attitude and piss off.

You're in a contract for unlimited data with AT&T? Really? How is that so, since iPhone contracts are 2 years and they ended unlimited data in 2010? AT&T doesn't HAVE to uphold the unlimited data agreement, they do it to be nice and to keep your business. You could be a little more understanding about them now having to deal with the fact that they have to deal with the consequences of unlimited.. either revoke it and piss off customers, or invest more capital to satisfy your all you can eat FaceTime for 30 dollars...
 

bretm

macrumors 68000
Apr 12, 2002
1,951
27
Since you have chosen to criticize my nation, let me "school" you a little. I signed a contract with AT&T in which they promised that they would give me all the data that I wanted if I would pay them $30. I have kept my end of the contract. Then AT&T said "Oh, we didn't think about the fact that technology would increase the amount of data that people would use. We would don't want to keep our end of the agreement." They knew that if the forced you off the contract they would get sued, so they tried things like, "if you make any change to your plan you lose your unlimited" or, throttling which I believe is illegal. Imagine what would have happened if I said "hey, when I agreed to $30 a month I didn't realize that I was going to lose my job, so I only want to pay you $10. I have a contract with AT&T. I have kept my end. They keep trying to change the rules because they made a ****** bargain. I know this is off topic a little, but please take your condescending foreign attitude and piss off.

True true. But your "contract" was for 2 years. So, that's pretty easy to get out of. And you gotta read the fine print, or lack thereof. They never promised you any particular speed. Just unlimited data. The last time they offered those plans, their fastest speed was probably 2mb/sec so I think they could easily argue that what they promised in the original plan couldn't have been more than that.
 

doctorossi

macrumors member
Apr 16, 2008
54
0
These grandfathered unlimited plans are based on a business model that far predates the technology packed into an iphone now.

Then perhaps they should've thought a little further ahead than the next quarter before deciding to offer it. The march of technology is not the consumers' problem to deal with. AT&T offered an unlimited plan. Consumers who purchased it are entitled to receive it. AT&T's problem- end of story.
 

ironpony

macrumors regular
Oct 28, 2011
186
135
md
This is just getting too picky on ATT's part.

Did I see a commercial this morning, or during MN Football where Verizon allows unlimited Netflix, Pandora and something else.???
 

GSPice

macrumors 68000
Nov 24, 2008
1,632
89
what charge? Apple puts a charging/connection cable in every iphone box for free.

The only charge is for an adapter to use an old speaker etc with the new iphone. But apple didn't force you to buy that speaker, it's not required for using the iphone. You made that choice on your own. And if the company that made it doesn't want to contact apple for permission to make the adapter and give it away to previous buyers that's not apple's fault either.

+1000000000
 

cvaldes

macrumors 68040
Dec 14, 2006
3,237
0
somewhere else
Dammit, if I want to use my grandfathered unlimited data plan to sit on FaceTime 24/7 playing chess with family members who live several states away, that's my prerogative. We should all be allowed to do this. Unlimited and cheap data for everyone! Sure, it might crash the local network in heavy data traffic areas and it might raise the rates of our data plans, but it's a natural right given to all persons at birth.

Image of Veruca Salt

/s

The average American is sorely lacking in knowledge of basic macro and microeconomic principles.
Veruca Salt is English.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.