You hit the nail on the head!
Actually, the US needs a complete overhaul of their infrastructure in it's entirety. This place is looking like a 3rd world country.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Clauses in AT&T Contracts Have Always Provided for Limits on 'Unlimited' Data Plans
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You hit the nail on the head!
Actually, the US needs a complete overhaul of their infrastructure in it's entirety. This place is looking like a 3rd world country.
The US is 3,794,101 sq miles with a population density of 87 people per square mile.
Lets compare that to another country like England which is 50,346 sq miles, with a population density of 1,023 per square mile.
There are nearly 12 times more "potential customers" per square mile financially supporting the network.
The size of our country compared to the number of people who reside here are what keeps our networks weak. Most of us would rather have coverage everywhere we go rather than lightning speeds. It's a trade off.
Yeah, and you can pay for it. What does this quote actually have to do with the original post.
People in third world countries don't worry about which wireless carrier to take. They worry about how they're going to put food on their table. Please don't exaggerate.
I say end contracts. If carriers can change their terms in the middle of a contract, we should do the same
Go back and read the post that my post was in response to, then maybe you'll get what I was trying to "say." Ok?
I think its a scam
I think it's all a scam to get unlimited users to switch plans. Check out my usage graph and explain to me why I have a sudden, massive jump in data use in December 2011 when my phone-use habits have not changed one bit:
When I tweeted to their customer care about it, all they said was "@ATT: if you are looking to avoid reduced data speeds checkout our other plans http://trunc.it/k7m9d" Thanks for nothing, customer care!
I think it's all a scam to get unlimited users to switch plans. Check out my usage graph and explain to me why I have a sudden, massive jump in data use in December 2011 when my phone-use habits have not changed one bit:
When I tweeted to their customer care about it, all they said was "@ATT: if you are looking to avoid reduced data speeds checkout our other plans http://trunc.it/k7m9d" Thanks for nothing, customer care!
I left them about 2 years ago, despite the fact that the iPhone was exclusive to ATT at the time, for reasons very similar to yours. Their customer service was, and probably still is, horrible. Inadequate communication with its customers is just one symptom of this larger problem.
----------
I think it's all a scam to get unlimited users to switch plans. Check out my usage graph and explain to me why I have a sudden, massive jump in data use in December 2011 when my phone-use habits have not changed one bit:
Image
When I tweeted to their customer care about it, all they said was "@ATT: if you are looking to avoid reduced data speeds checkout our other plans http://trunc.it/k7m9d" Thanks for nothing, customer care!
Did you switch to a 4S device? I know that some people reported jumps in data usage which was linked to Siri in some instances.
What percent profit did Apple make? What percent profit did AT&T and/or Verison make? Just want to make sure that the condemnation is applied appropriately. I think if you research it, you might find out who is ripping you off and it's not any of the carriers
And I love Apple but hate the bashing of every company that makes money while turning and looking the other way while Apple profits more than any of the others.
Why?
Why can't ATT(or VZW for that matter) offer $10 for 1gb, $20 for 2gb and $30 for 3gb and so on?
Why is there such a gap between each data allotment?
Why do they charge extra for tethering on top of their data plan?
Why are we still being charged so much for SMS packages?
Why throttle?
Why if bandwidth/spectrum is scarce.. do they keep pushing more phones to go on that spectrum? Doesn't make sense...
Why do we pay the same for our "on contract" plan as people who BYOD with "off contract" plan? That kind of debunks the cellco argument that "We make up for phone subsidy on service plans"
Lastly why with all this questions are people still using their services? Cellcos are like drug dealers... Nobody likes their drug dealers, but they continue to buy from them anyway..
Why can't ATT(or VZW for that matter) offer $10 for 1gb, $20 for 2gb and $30 for 3gb and so on?
Why is there such a gap between each data allotment?
Why do they charge extra for tethering on top of their data plan?
Why are we still being charged so much for SMS packages?
Why throttle?
Why if bandwidth/spectrum is scarce.. do they keep pushing more phones to go on that spectrum? Doesn't make sense...
Why do we pay the same for our "on contract" plan as people who BYOD with "off contract" plan? That kind of debunks the cellco argument that "We make up for phone subsidy on service plans"
Lastly why with all this questions are people still using their services? Cellcos are like drug dealers... Nobody likes their drug dealers, but they continue to buy from them anyway..
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)
I would normally agree with you, but the speeds are much worse in densely populated areas of the US than in the rural areas. It seems like 90% of the ATT complaints come from NYC and San Francisco. In the more rural areas, I can pull 5-8mbps pretty easily
ericrwalker said:
I would normally agree with you, but the speeds are much worse in densely populated areas of the US than in the rural areas. It seems like 90% of the ATT complaints come from NYC and San Francisco. In the more rural areas, I can pull 5-8mbps pretty easily
Why does Apple charge $600 for a $39 memory upgrade to 16GB of RAM on an iMac?
Why does Apple make you pay for $160-$350 for 3YR Applecare on a $1200-$5000 system priced 50% higher than other computers that come with 3YR Warranties.
Just want to make sure you understand how businesses are run and that the evil Verizon and AT&T are not anomalies.
Yes, you can sign that right away. People do it every day and it's perfectly legal.
Arbitration is still a legal proceeding and the outcome is binding to both parties. Failure to abide by that outcome can then be taken to court.
The reason companies choose arbitration over a court hearing is cost and not wanting to set legal precedent if they lose.
SF and NYC pose two unique sets of obstacles for carries. NYC has a crap load of steel buildings making a cell towers range very small.
SF has both a terrain issue and it takes up to 5 YEARS to get a permit for a new tower. All the tree huggers and the "Not in my backyard" types prevent expansion.
They complain about the service but make it nearly impossible to install new towers.
"Value isn't Free"
This Quote:
"Here's the big picture bottom line: If you use a lot of data, you are clearly getting some sort of value out of it. Value isn't free."
Thats right its not FREE, I am PAYING $30 a month for it! Explain to me how me having a $30 unlimited plan using 3gb a month is a tax on the network, when there are 5gb plans offered? The fact is, ATT can't take away the unlimited thing or they will lose millions of customers, so the next best thing is to bully their customers into other contracts, which oh BTW, restart a new 2 year contract when you do so. So this is all BS, and people out there even trying to make a claim that this is fair, obviously are in with these companies, or are just plain stupid.
NO ONE IS ASKING FOR FREE DATA, WE ARE ASKING TO GET WHAT WE PAID FOR! UNLIMITED WORRY FREE DATA USAGE! I am actually OK with certain types of throttling. I find Verizons to be pretty fair .IF you reach 5gb, and IF you are on a busy tower, at a certain time of day, you are TEMPORARIRLY throttled ..when you leave any one of those three variables, you are back to normal speeds. As opposed to ATT and the idea of throttling an entire billing cycle, regardless of bandwidth needs, when that is what they are claiming is the problem!
This Quote:
"Here's the big picture bottom line: If you use a lot of data, you are clearly getting some sort of value out of it. Value isn't free."
Thats right its not FREE, I am PAYING $30 a month for it! Explain to me how me having a $30 unlimited plan using 3gb a month is a tax on the network, when there are 5gb plans offered? The fact is, ATT can't take away the unlimited thing or they will lose millions of customers, so the next best thing is to bully their customers into other contracts, which oh BTW, restart a new 2 year contract when you do so. So this is all BS, and people out there even trying to make a claim that this is fair, obviously are in with these companies, or are just plain stupid.
NO ONE IS ASKING FOR FREE DATA, WE ARE ASKING TO GET WHAT WE PAID FOR! UNLIMITED WORRY FREE DATA USAGE! I am actually OK with certain types of throttling. I find Verizons to be pretty fair .IF you reach 5gb, and IF you are on a busy tower, at a certain time of day, you are TEMPORARIRLY throttled ..when you leave any one of those three variables, you are back to normal speeds. As opposed to ATT and the idea of throttling an entire billing cycle, regardless of bandwidth needs, when that is what they are claiming is the problem!
You are part of the problem! You suburbanites and your attendtude of "not in my backyard"!
Your even the type to buy a house right beside a Airport and then complain about Airplane noise.
I am saying that's the general attitude of people. I think it's silly thing too.
I live near the airport, but I am not under the flight path. If they move the flight path, I'll just move.
Most users use significantly less data than 2 GB. So how can a few people using 3 GB adversely affect their network? They also have a 5 GB data plan, so how can 3 GB adversely affect their network? The clause quoted doesn't give them any authority to throttle at 3 GB. Maybe at 5 GB, they have an argument that throttling is necessary to maintain their network. Anything less, no way!
What's sad too is that if you call to complain about the throttling, AT&T will offer to sell you the 5gb plan, and advertise it as not having any speed restrictions. In other words, the solution to your taxing the network is to sell you a plan that increases your total usage of the network. Oh the irony.
What percent profit did Apple make? What percent profit did AT&T and/or Verison make? Just want to make sure that the condemnation is applied appropriately. I think if you research it, you might find out who is ripping you off and it's not any of the carriers
I love apple products. But I hate their business practices. I do not disagree with you. After all they're the ones selling a $999 laptop with 2GB of ram in 2012. Or a router that costs $200. But this was an article about ATT, so I didn't think to bash apple.
Yep, given equally reasonable interpretations of a contract, courts generally side with the non-drafting party. However, we aren't universally seeing *equally reasonable* interpretations of the contract being bandied about on these boards. In fact, we have people completely *ignoring* the contract language in favor of "But that's not what *I* want!".
I'll do some more 'fancy' bolding here, just to point out that you're quite clearly wrong about what the contract says.
The contract explicitly says they can cut you off if they believe your usage is detrimental to the network. They don't have to prove it to a court in order to do so. That said, yes, a court will likely require them to substantiate their belief once suit is brought.
You seem to be quite fond of strawmen. I certainly never claimed that they could "just conjecture up any opinion, based on discrimination, superstition, etc". I said that they can trigger that clause if they *believe* the use in question fulfills the requirement. A particular court may or may not agree with their assessment, however, that doesn't mean they have to prove it to the court *before* doing so. That's a matter for the contract dispute process, which is what happens in court.
I'll certainly admit that you've referenced the contract, but I don't think you actually have a very good grasp of what it actually says and/or means.
First, no court requires "universal" agreement as to what counts as reasonable interpretations, so your criterion is irrelevant. Second, I don't have an AT&T contract so I don't want anything from them. I am arguing the point at hand, so again what you say is irrelevant, other than your acknowledging the point I made.
You are contradicting yourself here. If the court requires them to substantiate their beliefs, the court is requiring them to prove they have justifiable grounds for their beliefs.
First off, before you go throwing around claims that people are committing logical fallacies, you best make sure you got their position right, otherwise you yourself are committing straw men attacks. So let's clear that issue up right away. I never claimed that you said AT&T could conjecture up anything they want. Rather, what I did was give clear cut examples of what AT&T can and cannot do. I was specifying what would constitute reasonable beliefs that are uphold-able in a court of law. You acknowledged that very point in your previous comment, even if you fail to see the implications of what you said (here I am referring to the "a court likely may require AT&T to substantiate their beliefs"). So, as you, hopefully, can now see, your straw man claim holds no merit.
Second, I never claimed AT&T had to prove to a court their beliefs had merit before it could undertake whatever actions it deemed appropriate. I claimed that unless AT&T is careful in what it does, its actions may prove to be unjustified in a court of law. They may well be found to be in breach of contract and liable for damages. I also gave an argument why I think AT&T's current throttling practices would be found to be in breach of contract since they are not making reasonable attempts to minimally impact the service, where necessary, as they are bound to by the terms of their own contracts. So, again, stop beating around the bush and tackle the argument at hand. Your obfuscating tactics aren't fooling anyone.
Then provide counter-arguments or counter-examples to what I said. Stop blowing around hot rhetorical air.
DUH! They already have had the right to cap off or thottle any abusive use, at their discretion.
the world must be so black and white to you. This is why it's called contract "language". ATT is trying to commit fraud based on their own "interpretation" of the language, which is not based on evidence. I wish I could think like a five year old my entire life, things are so much easier in black and white
It's not fraud. The customers signed and agreed to the contract. Not sure what's so hard to understand about that. If the customer is unhappy with the feature, they may drop it by switching to a non smart device as well, they aren't even in contract with the feature. If the customer no longer is happy with their service, they are free to pay the pro-rated ETF, sell their device, and switch to a carrier that better suits them (like Verizon's 4GB LTE offer with LTE Android phones).