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
If you put your common sense hat on, and take off your bash AT&T hat, it will make sense...
Do you think AT&T cares about the amount of data someone downloads, or better yet, the amount of data the top 5% download? Does it affect their bottom line? NO. It affects their customers (95% of you) who are not abusing the plan. Do you want AT&T (or any other company) to stop abusers from slowing down the network so much that it affects the other users?
How does it affect everyone else? Well, they either have to raise prices so they can increase the speed of their network buildout (that is never-ending anyway), or the users will get a "Sprint" speed network so 5% can get their "discontinued" unlimited plan with a TOS they they agreed to.
AT&T seems to be making choices and leveling the playing field for all its users to take advantage of their network.
Do you think AT&T cares about the amount of data someone downloads, or better yet, the amount of data the top 5% download? Does it affect their bottom line? NO. It affects their customers (95% of you) who are not abusing the plan. Do you want AT&T (or any other company) to stop abusers from slowing down the network so much that it affects the other users?
How does it affect everyone else? Well, they either have to raise prices so they can increase the speed of their network buildout (that is never-ending anyway), or the users will get a "Sprint" speed network so 5% can get their "discontinued" unlimited plan with a TOS they they agreed to.
AT&T seems to be making choices and leveling the playing field for all its users to take advantage of their network.
The concept of selling anything like bandwidth as "unlimited" is a bad idea.
Even though fresh water is virtually limitless where I live relative to the number of people who live here, there is a very good reason why my local muni doesn't offer "unlimited" water plans... there is a certain percentage of the population that is going to turn their faucets wide open 24x7x365 just because they can and eventually it will become an issue for everyone (decreased water pressure, additional wear and tear on the infrastructure and if the trend catches on, then eventually the supply will become an issue and they'll have to build additional reservoirs).
Even though fresh water is virtually limitless where I live relative to the number of people who live here, there is a very good reason why my local muni doesn't offer "unlimited" water plans... there is a certain percentage of the population that is going to turn their faucets wide open 24x7x365 just because they can and eventually it will become an issue for everyone (decreased water pressure, additional wear and tear on the infrastructure and if the trend catches on, then eventually the supply will become an issue and they'll have to build additional reservoirs).
Last edited:
I've been debating switching to VZW. This will be one more factor in my decision. Having unlimited data "just in case" had been attractive. Now I guess I have a sort of unlimited plan that gets cut off at the knees after 3GB. I can just get a 3GB plan from VZW and have less dropped calls.
I would agree to an unlimited Chevron gas plan, but then I'd be bummed after the first 3 gallons, when it took seven days to fill the tank at throttled speeds, and ready to court whatever competitor wanted to make me a better offer. I'm not too thrilled with AT&T, but all this demonstrates is how poor their competition is. Who's running Verizon, actual clowns?
100 million happy customers? I'm in NY and let me tell you-no one here is really happy with AT&T. They merely tolerate it. Similar with other telecoms.
But enjoy your propaganda. How delusional of a fanboy do you have to be to use it to spring yourself into AT&T Fanboyism?
As someone who is from Canada, so doesn't have a horse in the race (I don't even own a cell phone), as it were, I don't understand the accusations that throttling users who use is an excessive amount of bandwidth means they're not unlimited. As far as I know, the plan is not for unlimited data rates at the highest speeds possible. Just unlimited data. AT&T isn't preventing people from using their data plan.
I understand where AT&T is coming from. First of all, when they made unlimited plans, I'm guessing they didn't foresee people using GBs of data. And the more people who hog band width, the more that impacts everyone and the more costly it is for AT&T.
It just seems to me people being selfish.
I understand where AT&T is coming from. First of all, when they made unlimited plans, I'm guessing they didn't foresee people using GBs of data. And the more people who hog band width, the more that impacts everyone and the more costly it is for AT&T.
It just seems to me people being selfish.
Cool it with the personal attacks. Explain how someone paying $x for y MB (or GB) of data need to pay extra depending on what device they use to consume that data (i.e. tethering)? Charging an extra fee for tethering is the very definition of double-dipping.
Like the users who stream Netflix 24x7, even if they aren't watching it, so they can use up as much data as possible?
Can anyone remind me what the 'grandfathered' cost of 'unlimited' is/was?
It seems that it was $30, but its not broken out on my bill in any understandable way.
If it is $30, then why in the world would I pay the same to get a 3GB cap?
Make it $20 for 3GB and I'd be perfectly happy to switch to that in order to exercise other flexibility without losing my unlimited (which I don't come close to using.
It seems that it was $30, but its not broken out on my bill in any understandable way.
If it is $30, then why in the world would I pay the same to get a 3GB cap?
Make it $20 for 3GB and I'd be perfectly happy to switch to that in order to exercise other flexibility without losing my unlimited (which I don't come close to using.
Why should they be banned from saying that?? First off ATT DOES NOT sell an unlimited data plan anymore. Second, the people that still have the unlimited plan are still FREE to suck down as much data as they can but at some point around 3gb they get throttled back but are not charged more for going over 3GB like people that are on the 3gb plan would be charged.
No it hasn't!!! I'm still paying for it! They said we could keep our unlimited plans. They haven't forced me onto a tiered plan yet. Once they do that then it will be expired!
Actually they do still sell it! They just don't sell it to new customers!
Apple should foot the bill or cloud be exempt from 3GB
I signed up for Music Match... I stream to & from I cloud... music, docs & TV spots for work... I believe that streaming i directly to apple should be FREE. All these new features are going to kill our plans
I signed up for Music Match... I stream to & from I cloud... music, docs & TV spots for work... I believe that streaming i directly to apple should be FREE. All these new features are going to kill our plans
Sabo
That clause was clearly meant for people INTENTIONALLY sabotaging AT&T's system. Not for customers who are using their phone's normal functions. I call foul.
That clause was clearly meant for people INTENTIONALLY sabotaging AT&T's system. Not for customers who are using their phone's normal functions. I call foul.
Problem is deceptive marketing
The only problem here is that AT&T opted to call their plan the "unlimited" data plan. Their contract terms are contrary to their plan nomenclature. There is no "unlimited" plan. If they had called their plan "sorta unlimited until you catch up to the more expensive plan" there wouldn't be a problem.
But being as they referred to the plan as "unlimited," it would not be asking too much, as a consumer, to expect the plan to be unlimited.
In its current state, I would suspect that what we are seeing could be billed deceptive marketing.
The only problem here is that AT&T opted to call their plan the "unlimited" data plan. Their contract terms are contrary to their plan nomenclature. There is no "unlimited" plan. If they had called their plan "sorta unlimited until you catch up to the more expensive plan" there wouldn't be a problem.
But being as they referred to the plan as "unlimited," it would not be asking too much, as a consumer, to expect the plan to be unlimited.
In its current state, I would suspect that what we are seeing could be billed deceptive marketing.
Not Then, Not Now...
That I recall the unlimited data plan when it was first available was not throttled. So if we are locked-in (grandfathered) in to a data plain that did not originally include throttling from the beginning. Then their should be no right to start changing a plan that we are locked-in (grandfathered) into.
It's like if you went to a restaurant and ordered a "whole" pie and they served it to you. Once you ate "half" of it then the manger comes out and takes the other half back from you saying that they are out of pie and need your other half back for other customers and leaving you with out a say in the matter. The only thing you are left with is just crumbs from the pie. Not even a partial refund.
If that was to happen you can't tell me you would be happy and okay with it...
Further more in a digital age where data of any kind is in high demand on any kind of device you can't say that 300MB, 3GB, or even 5GB of data is enough. Then to charge $10 for each additional 1GB is a fair price. Come on! You can't even buy a "NEW" computer these days that has a 5GB hard drive.
It is this simple if you are locked-in (grandfathered) into something such as the unlimited data plan then you should also be locked-in (grandfathered) into the contract that was in place at the time you originally signed the contract...
That I recall the unlimited data plan when it was first available was not throttled. So if we are locked-in (grandfathered) in to a data plain that did not originally include throttling from the beginning. Then their should be no right to start changing a plan that we are locked-in (grandfathered) into.
It's like if you went to a restaurant and ordered a "whole" pie and they served it to you. Once you ate "half" of it then the manger comes out and takes the other half back from you saying that they are out of pie and need your other half back for other customers and leaving you with out a say in the matter. The only thing you are left with is just crumbs from the pie. Not even a partial refund.
If that was to happen you can't tell me you would be happy and okay with it...
Further more in a digital age where data of any kind is in high demand on any kind of device you can't say that 300MB, 3GB, or even 5GB of data is enough. Then to charge $10 for each additional 1GB is a fair price. Come on! You can't even buy a "NEW" computer these days that has a 5GB hard drive.
It is this simple if you are locked-in (grandfathered) into something such as the unlimited data plan then you should also be locked-in (grandfathered) into the contract that was in place at the time you originally signed the contract...
I hope AT&T now realizes they should/could have avoided this PR mess by not grandfathering in these unlimited plans. The terms of the last of the non-grandfathered unlimited contracts will be ending this June.
So What
AT&T should not have oversold their services just to gain subscribers. if they ate in such a pinch they should let people out of their contracts not push them in to another one.
AT&T should not have oversold their services just to gain subscribers. if they ate in such a pinch they should let people out of their contracts not push them in to another one.
Let me get this straight....
Horsesh-t.
Use 3 gb per month on the 3 gb plan and you're a valued customer.
- Use the same 3 gb on an unlimited plan and you're someone "whose usage adversely impacts its wireless network or service levels or hinders access to its wireless network."
Horsesh-t.
"Adversely impacts its wireless network"
So if they say 3 gigs of usage adversely impacts their network, I assume 5 gig plan users are also throttled after reaching 3 gigs too, right?
Doesn't make sense, why is my usage at 3 gigs some how adversely impacting their network when another customer at 3gigs with a 5gig plan is not. It's all on the same network.
If they want to call it unlimited, then it should always be treated the same as whatever max tiered plan is currently offered before making claims about excessive use and throttling.
I only see adversely impacting their wallet, not the network, when a "single" unlimited user passes 3 gigs without paying the higher cost of the 5gig plan, which didn't exist back then.
So if they say 3 gigs of usage adversely impacts their network, I assume 5 gig plan users are also throttled after reaching 3 gigs too, right?
Doesn't make sense, why is my usage at 3 gigs some how adversely impacting their network when another customer at 3gigs with a 5gig plan is not. It's all on the same network.
If they want to call it unlimited, then it should always be treated the same as whatever max tiered plan is currently offered before making claims about excessive use and throttling.
I only see adversely impacting their wallet, not the network, when a "single" unlimited user passes 3 gigs without paying the higher cost of the 5gig plan, which didn't exist back then.
Last edited: