AT&T to Restrict or Charge for FaceTime Over 3G/4G in iOS 6? [Updated With AT&T Statement]

[GFLPraxis]

This reminds me of how Khan only thought in two dimensions while chasing the Enterprise in that nebula, while Kirk was navigating in three.

Yes, data is data... but the amount used per instant time period is the limiting factor, not the total over a long period.

Consider an un-upgraded cell site with 10Mbps backhaul. If 100 users are connected and they're all surfing the web or doing email, with each randomly using an average of 1Mb every ten seconds, the backhaul can handle it. If there's a slight glitch, the user doesn't notice it.

Now consider if 10 of those users are doing video streaming at 1Mbps. Oops. They require the entire backhaul capability, leaving the other 90 people with nothing.

It's as if you were allowed 1,000 gals of water a month. Using that allocation slowly over the entire month... such as taking a bath every day... doesn't harm anyone else's random access to the shared water main. Opening several fire hydraunts will.

So what? I can use Skype over 3G. AT&T has no right to charge me to use a certain type of video traffic when I am already paying data. The concept is absurd. Charging me extra for using a certain protocol? All they're doing is making a feature useless and pushing me to another service.

 

[mgsarch]

So, I pay for data, then pay for the right to use my data in certain ways? (Wifi Hotspot, now Facetime)

FCC, do something already.

 

[christophermdia]

I think I am going to switch to Verizon anyway.....Look at when iPhone introduced MMS, ATT took almost a year to implement it. Now the iPad 3 has hotspot feature, and its not even active on ATT while Verizon has offered it since Day 1. I went with the Verizon iPad and overall I am happy with the service I get. Much better service while traveling than ATT, and even at things like basketball games, I could never send a TXT with ATT, but Verizon works just fine. Of course, another reason personally is that Verizon offers LTE where I live and ATT doesnt.

If ATT wants to lose customers then this is exactly how to do it. Charge for FaceTime.

 

[Daalseth]

I'm about to say screw smartphones altogether and go back to dumb phones with texting for the entire family.

I'm there. I have a minimal, pay as you go phone that does voice and texting only. Month to month no contract. I use it for a couple or three calls per month. I use my iPod Touch almost continuously for Skype and FaceTime and IM and e-mail and Apps, and all sorts of things on WiFi.

Cellular is a great technology that is being destroyed by thugs that make a drug cartel look honest.

 

[OatmealRocks]

This reminds me of how Khan only thought in two dimensions while chasing the Enterprise in that nebula, while Kirk was navigating in three.

Yes, data is data... but the amount used per instant time period is the limiting factor, not the total over a long period.

Consider an un-upgraded cell site with 10Mbps backhaul. If 100 users are connected and they're all surfing the web or doing email, with each randomly using an average of 1Mb every ten seconds, the backhaul can handle it. If there's a slight glitch, the user doesn't notice it.

Now consider if 10 of those users are doing video streaming at 1Mbps. Oops. They require the entire backhaul capability, leaving the other 90 people with nothing.

It's as if you were allowed 1,000 gals of water a month. Using that allocation slowly over the entire month... such as taking a bath every day... doesn't harm anyone else's random access to the shared water main. Opening several fire hydraunts will.

I think what you are trying to say bandwidth capacity or demand usage if you are thinking of the utility industry. Historically cellular service providers say a lot of BS. Until I see some clear data.. It is BS if they say it is impacting their infrastructure. The reason being, these providers (larger ones) also provided, cable Internet, TV services etc. in Canada one company caps Internet to 60gb/month and traffic shaping anyone who uses torrent and blames these "users" to affecting traffic. However some report that was done and it was found only 5% of available bandwidth was being used and never exceeded single digit threshold.

 

[Macboy Pro]

This is a whole article on a bunch of assumptions with no facts or even inferences of fact. Where does it say AT&T is going to charge? Sure did bring out the AT&T haters. Wonder when the AT&T haters will finally migrate to Verizon? and why they haven't already.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

There are many other apps that are bursty and network-intensive. Video streaming apps, interactive games, any 3rd party communication apps (Skype, Fring, IM+,...). The data burstiness averages out across hundreds and thousands of users.

There is nothing unique about FaceTime that justifies an uplift charge.

Just going to point out a difference between streaming video and video chatting.
Streaming video can be buffered so they could load up say the next 5-10 secs on the phone ahead of time. During that 5-10 seconds they can divert those resources to other users who need a burst of data.

On video chatting buffering can not be done so it must keep a constant usage.

On top of that the upstream channel is smaller than the down stream channel and video chatting require just as much upstream as down stream so you are getting hit twice.
Chances are it is the upstream side AT&T is by far more concerned about than the down stream.

----------

I think what you are trying to say bandwidth capacity or demand usage if you are thinking of the utility industry. Historically cellular service providers say a lot of BS. Until I see some clear data.. It is BS if they say it is impacting their infrastructure. The reason being, these providers (larger ones) also provided, cable Internet, TV services etc. in Canada one company caps Internet to 60gb/month and traffic shaping anyone who uses torrent and blames these "users" to affecting traffic. However some report that was done and it was found only 5% of available bandwidth was being used and never exceeded single digit threshold.

did those studies look at the bottle neck points or over all. Data is only as fast as the slowest point on the chain. So if the bottle necks are breaking say 80% you have issues.

 

[OatmealRocks]

----------

[/COLOR]

did those studies look at the bottle neck points or over all. Data is only as fast as the slowest point on the chain. So if the bottle necks are breaking say 80% you have issues.

Maybe I wasn't clear. It never exceeded single digits % to the overall available bandwidth.

Basically these companies are changing their terms of service and in a way splitting hairs on how they can generate a new revenue stream while maximizing revenue from their customers.

This is not Free market but collusion. Anyone here who have been overseas such as Asia will now of real free market in cellular service industry.

 

[nbrink91]

AT&T is seriously an awful and greedy company. Some of the articles about the CEO making greedy comments seriously set me off. I am glad I am with Verizon as of now just because I can't stand that man, although Verizon is pushing it to.

Someone who is with AT&T needs to start a Change.org petition or something because this is completely ridiculous. The two big cell companies are abusing the system by taking advantage of their marketshare, pretty much a joint monopoly, and increasing prices and forcing people into plans.

Change.org changed Bank of America's mind about charging debit fees, so maybe if will do something to get AT&T's attention... I won't hold my breath. People need to send in complaints to the FCC too and send some emails to get at least someones attention.

I'm just P'd off because I know Verizon will be following AT&Ts lead just because they can.

Just my 2 cents

 

[batitombo]

can't wait for the new iPhone! Can't wait to switch

 

[hitekalex]

Just going to point out a difference between streaming video and video chatting.

Video streaming was just one example of the three I gave. Many other apps like interactive games and 3rd-party video chatting apps use bi-directional bandwidth.

If AT&T is concerned with upstream bandwidth, they should have structured their data plans accordingly - i.e. have separate data caps for downstream and upstream bandwidth.

Picking out a selective service (FaceTime) and charging for it separately isn't the right approach.

 

[bobr1952]

This is a whole article on a bunch of assumptions with no facts or even inferences of fact. Where does it say AT&T is going to charge? Sure did bring out the AT&T haters. Wonder when the AT&T haters will finally migrate to Verizon? and why they haven't already.

I have to agree with you--yes--ATT may indeed charge for Facetime over 3G but I'd suggest waiting until 6.0 is released--or ATT comes out with a firm policy--before assumptions are made.

 

[GravityEyes]

Oh really? Well f--- AT&T - I'll jailbreak.

 

[hitekalex]

I have to agree with you--yes--ATT may indeed charge for Facetime over 3G but I'd suggest waiting until 6.0 is released--or ATT comes out with a firm policy--before assumptions are made.

It is obvious that AT&T is going to either charge for FT-over-cell or restrict its usage in some way. Otherwise, what would be the purpose of the banner that now comes up when attempting to place FT call over cell?

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Maybe I wasn't clear. It never exceeded single digits % to the overall available bandwidth.

Basically these companies are changing their terms of service and in a way splitting hairs on how they can generate a new revenue stream while maximizing revenue from their customers.

This is not Free market but collusion. Anyone here who have been overseas such as Asia will now of real free market in cellular service industry.

So translation the study is worthless. Since it is doing overall bandwidth it never looked at the bottle necks and the real limiting factors.

Video streaming was just one example of the three I gave. Many other apps like interactive games and 3rd-party video chatting apps use bi-directional bandwidth.

If AT&T is concerned with upstream bandwidth, they should have structured their data plans accordingly - i.e. have separate data caps for downstream and upstream bandwidth.

Picking out a selective service (FaceTime) and charging for it separately isn't the right approach.

3rd party games they tend to be burst data and have spikes. Also it is not as much data as you think. Video streaming uses a hell of a lot more.

3rd party well that is another story but little harder to control that one.

Facetime Apple is going to demand very high bandwidth for it and quality. Apple would not be willing to really down scale to lower quality either.
That being said I see this as a money grab by AT&T. Apple in many ways is becoming more and more like other cell phone manufatures and bending to the wills of the carriers. They could really use there spot to force things to change for the better for everyone but instead they just bend over like everyone else for the US carriers.

 

[hitekalex]

Facetime Apple is going to demand very high bandwidth for it and quality. Apple would not be willing to really down scale to lower quality either.

I don't think FT bandwidth consumption is any higher than other comparable services like Skype. FT is based on industry-standard H.264/AAC codecs, which are variable-rate codecs and adaptable to what underlying network can reliably support.

Other social networks like Googe+ and Facebook are all pushing video comms, so there's going to be a lot of video chat users outside of FaceTime.

 

[pmz]

I don't think FT bandwidth consumption is any higher than other comparable services like Skype. FT is based on industry-standard H.264/AAC codecs, which are variable-rate codecs and adaptable to what underlying network can reliably support.

Other social networks like Googe+ and Facebook are all pushing video comms, so there's going to be a lot of video chat users outside of FaceTime.

No one (apple/at&t/otherwise) restricts my company's App either. We have a virtual office product for event professionals that does video conferencing, but the bandwidth usage is so low (and the app is free) so we must still be under the radar.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

I don't think FT bandwidth consumption is any higher than other comparable services like Skype. FT is based on industry-standard H.264/AAC codecs, which are variable-rate codecs and adaptable to what underlying network can reliably support.

Other social networks like Googe+ and Facebook are all pushing video comms, so there's going to be a lot of video chat users outside of FaceTime.

But that encoding is based on the Application using said codecs. Apple has a long history of wanting highest quality so if they set the limitation higher than others you have problems. It would mean things would need to be a lot more conjected before FT would down grade.

 

[tbobmccoy]

can't wait for the new iPhone! Can't wait to switch

Me too. My wife has an iPhone that she picked up in April of last year, and if I take my iPhone and go to tmobs or virgin, I'll save money on the purchase. Screw these greedy telecoms.

 

[cwwilson]

I thought Roger Goodell was power hungry but this Randall guy is on another level.

 

[hitekalex]

But that encoding is based on the Application using said codecs. Apple has a long history of wanting highest quality so if they set the limitation higher than others you have problems. It would mean things would need to be a lot more conjected before FT would down grade.

I wouldn't just make that assumption without tesing bandwith utilization under different conditions. I make Skype video calls over 4G all the time, and the quality is comparable to FaceTime.

 

[mgsarch]

This is a whole article on a bunch of assumptions with no facts or even inferences of fact. Where does it say AT&T is going to charge? Sure did bring out the AT&T haters. Wonder when the AT&T haters will finally migrate to Verizon? and why they haven't already.

Interesting presumptions you've made there. Did you miss the screenshot and countless reports showing a message nearly identical to the one associated with wifi hotspot activation? You know, that "service" AT&T charges extra for. Shocking we would think this is indicative of the same thing happening with facetime.

 

[robertjamesm]

Won't use it period !

I don't even use FaceTime that often and when I do its used only on WIFI where there is no ambient noise. If they think they are going to charge me to use it on my own DATA plan they are crazy. Apple should do what Steve Jobs was planning to make their own Apple cellphone network.

 

[Dominicanyor]

Well I was going to switch from sprint to AT&T and I keep hearing about all this fees that AT&T has and I'm changing my mind about making the switch. AT&T has a fee if people fart lmao.

 

[Ballis]

FaceTime isn't video only. It can do audio only if we want it to. So in short, FaceTime is like iMessage, where iMessage targets text plans, FaceTime targets voice plans.

You can FaceTime without video? How?