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.
Developer Claims Three Major Carriers Throttle iPhone and iPad Data Speeds
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Out of curiosity: How does a provider who offers a flatrate make more money by letting his users download more data?
I installed the carrier file, twice as fast after, same location. It's a legitimate carrier file. Reminds me of the old days when you could activate hotspot for free.
Yeah well people pretty much believe what they want to believe regardless of the facts.
Huh. I find this throttling practice to be very unfair. To categorize all iPhone users as people who use a lot of data? Hmmm. Why not do this to select few customers who use ANY phone that uses too much data to the point that it could disrupt the network?
Throttling by itself is actually a pretty common practice in many parts of the world. In the UK for example O2 throttle speeds of prepay customers and customers on its MVNO, Giffgaff. Whereas in Thailand, all iPhone plans come with unlimited data with the different quota. Once you hit it, your speeds will be reduced to 362kbps until you choose to buy more data blocks.
Throttling by itself is actually a pretty common practice in many parts of the world. In the UK for example O2 throttle speeds of prepay customers and customers on its MVNO, Giffgaff. Whereas in Thailand, all iPhone plans come with unlimited data with the different quota. Once you hit it, your speeds will be reduced to 362kbps until you choose to buy more data blocks.
This is bogus. On AT&T I consistently get over 20MB down in Cincinnati, and regularly a crazy 45-50MB down in my area. In NY I regularly see 15-20MB down.
What percentage of the major providers data contracts are "flat rate"?
Sounds like you want this to be true. How do you explain all the screenshots of people getting higher speeds? Just wondering.
The ones I know (AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile)?What percentage of the major providers data contracts are "flat rate"?
100%
So they want "Healthier" network instead of more money? Doesn't sound like the providers I know. You're very busy thinking of why this must be true. When simple logic says otherwise. How do you explain all the screenshots of people getting higher speeds? Put on you're thinking cap.
Just because a bunch of people are posting screenshots with high speeds doesn't mean that there isn't a throttling mechanism in place somewhere along the line.
If you honestly believe that carriers don't manage their networks by capping usage and throttling speeds to accommodate various levels of traffic, then there is no point in continuing the conversation.
People tend to have an extremely simplistic view of how carriers do what they do. In fact, it is extremely complicated. And yes, there are decisions that are made that prioritize infrastructure over dollars. If the infrastructure goes, then the dollars stop flowing.
The question is not "if", but "why?", "how?" and "how much?"
Poor analogy. It is well established that the Internet is not like an interstate highway, but is actually a series of tubes.
It's all about upselling.
"You're currently 10% away from hitting your maximum allowed amount of data for the month. You can purchase another 1GB for only $10."
Before and after hack results.
I live in central IL without LTE and here are my results with some moderate speed increases after the hack.
(top three after the hack)
I live in central IL without LTE and here are my results with some moderate speed increases after the hack.
(top three after the hack)
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't higher data speeds mean more data consumed? More data consumed means more money for the provider. Why would they want less money? Sounds a little fishy. What am I missing? I personally use VOIP and a MiFi device for phone and internet so am not real familiar with cellular billing.
Well, the obvious explanation is that their networks cannot handle higher total throughput at present.
A conspiracy theory is that they want to gradually increase their percentage of Android users base since they earn more from each Android user than an iPhone user (the same monthly rate, less subsidy payout, less actual network usage).
Apple has always been very kind to carriers and has always acted in order to limit bandwith consumption:
- no MMS on iPhone 3GS until a late version of iOS
- no Faketime over 3G for years after it would have been possible
etc etc.
That's why carriers used to love them so much in spite of their high prices.
But this is too obviously against consumers rights not to deserve some kind of trial.
- no MMS on iPhone 3GS until a late version of iOS
- no Faketime over 3G for years after it would have been possible
etc etc.
That's why carriers used to love them so much in spite of their high prices.
But this is too obviously against consumers rights not to deserve some kind of trial.
As long as you are in London and are standing in the street, on the top of a hill on a clear day with no surrounding high buildings, at 2am in the morning...., perhaps.
I'd be fine with them limiting speeds if we had the option to pay for more speed like with terrestrial networks. And any such limits should be applied equally to all devices, within device capabilities of course.
Sure, as long as the carrier also proportionately refund me for discounting the service (what they actually provide vs. what they originally advertised).
What if we all wear tin foil hats to stop them from "throttling" our brains? Sounds good to me.
If the carrier disclose this fact in advance, I am sure there will be less customers upgrading their services. So the carriers lied to get their customers pay more, and you call it "fair"?