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.
European Carriers Claim Apple Should Pay for Network Infrastructure
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Exactly! The carriers are whining because they haven't looked forward to see where cellular communication was heading. They didn't invest properly in their infrastructure and now are whining that it's not good enough. Instead of admitting a lack of vision and poor management, they want to dump their troubles on the companies who helped transform cellular communication.
Would be nice to have someone pay for infrastructure upgrades. Considering how parts of Europe have 100 up/100 down fiber for consumers while in the USA, a superpower, still has maybe 50 up/12 down. The USA basically is a superpower with the infrastructure of a 3rd world country practically. [/hyperbole]
Would be nice if everyone had 1 gig up & down. Then Apple could finally deliver 1080p video at a good (IE BluRay or better) quality.
Would be nice if everyone had 1 gig up & down. Then Apple could finally deliver 1080p video at a good (IE BluRay or better) quality.
Glad to see pretty much everyone here is in favor of Net Neutrality. This is an example for why it is needed. It is the responsibility of the carriers to adapt and offer what they can. Don't offer unlimited if you don't mean it.
AT&T stopped offering it. Caps are a much better solution than arbitrarily fighting against apps that use a lot of data while offering unlimited, knowing that not much will be used.
AT&T stopped offering it. Caps are a much better solution than arbitrarily fighting against apps that use a lot of data while offering unlimited, knowing that not much will be used.
American net companies also want Google to pay access to their servers here. It's no different, same circus different show location. Net neutrality is the solution tho this kind of thinking.
Bingo. That is the correct answer. When AT&T moved from "unlimited" to "capped" plans, I checked my data usage -- on average I have around 100 to 200 MB of data every month. My wife was the same except where she had purchased a large chunk of media while on 3G once (she spiked for one month).
Make the folks who use the data pay for it. If you want to do capped plans like AT&T then they should probably give us an allowance for spiking in some months (like roll-over megabytes). But if we paid per MB or per GB then there would not be an issue.
AT&T failed in that even after capping usage and charging for each additional GB they still charge an extra monthly fee to enable tethering. What is that about? That's like the electric company charging me monthly because I purchased a second refrigerator in addition to charging more for the power consumption of the new fridge.
Neither should pay. Most carriers lock out tethering on Google Android devices. You have to root the device to get free tethering -- this is no different than jailbreaking your iPhone. Some carriers (like Sprint) offer unlimited data on Android devices for WiFi hotspot or tethering -- that is only sustainable as long as they have a minimal number of subscribers. If these guys paid per MB or per GB then it would not be an issue. Tether to your heart's content -- just pay for the data you use.
Well, "Evil" is obviously hyperbole. Aside from that, I'll take another crack at defending this.
Apple is making a lot of money selling iPhones. So are the carriers, now. But the question is about the future. As Apple, and all the Android magnafacturers, keep making more and more data hungry cell phones, the carriers are going to have to massively invest in infrastructure. That means we'll be buying phones cheap, but we'll have to pay more for plans.
It also means that the telecos are basically investing huge amounts of money to support Apple et. al's business plan. (if the increased infrastructure doesn't exist, the handsets are useless.)
So it makes some sense that if you're going to sell a data-hungry phone, you should support the investment that is going to make that phone usable.
Do carrier want to keep doing their job?
If I was Apple with a situation like this one I would but the network right away with the revenue they have. However, some antitrust issue will arise right away
.
STOP COMPLAINING THEY ARE GIVING YOU WORK.
Soon car manifacturer will have to pay for road works.
If I was Apple with a situation like this one I would but the network right away with the revenue they have. However, some antitrust issue will arise right away
.STOP COMPLAINING THEY ARE GIVING YOU WORK.
Soon car manifacturer will have to pay for road works.
Last edited by a moderator:
Excellent post, and IMO the most sensible yet. Pay for what you use. Stop forcing those of us who act responsibly/frugally to cover for those who do not. I fully support people having open access to whatever data they need/want, I do NOT support paying for someone else's privilege to have that open access.
Bad reasoning
This is just such bad reasoning. It is the carrier that decides the price for the data service. If the carriers do not want people to use as much data traffic, they must of course charge more for that service. Fine. Then do so rather than complaining. But then be prepared that people move to other carriers that provide better data services. Do not expect to eat the cake and still have it: make us pay for data traffic, but not be able to use it.
If you want to attract people that want smartphones rather than feature phones, you have to be able to provide a decent data service. So make up your mind on what business you want, carriers, rather than complain about it.
This is just such bad reasoning. It is the carrier that decides the price for the data service. If the carriers do not want people to use as much data traffic, they must of course charge more for that service. Fine. Then do so rather than complaining. But then be prepared that people move to other carriers that provide better data services. Do not expect to eat the cake and still have it: make us pay for data traffic, but not be able to use it.
If you want to attract people that want smartphones rather than feature phones, you have to be able to provide a decent data service. So make up your mind on what business you want, carriers, rather than complain about it.
We're not in Europe. We're just offshore trying to mind our own business.
I think its important to recognize that this story says "carriers in Europe" -- it does not say anything about the UK or anything about the European Union either (UK is technically part of Europe, but tends to act on its own and not as part the EU mentality). The moral of the story to learn here is that carriers suck -- no matter where they are geographically.
IF the EU decides to put some legal backing to the demands of these stupid carriers, then I personally think Apple and Google should just stop selling their devices in EU countries. Then the folks in the UK can taunt their friends in the mainland when they are sporting the latest iPhone-5s and Android devices next year and the citizens of the EU countries will tell their bonehead politicians to rethink siding with the carriers.
Until then Apple and Google should tell France Telecom where to stick it.
The cost of success
I love Europe and kinda dig their consumer protection laws. But, I feel this is a step too far.
Shouldnt it be the carriers' responsibility to keep their networks up? Did Apple force them to carry the iPhone, did their sales not go through the roof with the iPhone, have they not considered taking the massive profit theyre making from the iPhone to update their networks.
What if a company has a bomb, lets pick on Microsoftwill Microsoft get away with not subsidizing the carriers?
Shouldnt the carriers had negotiated this before hand?
I love Europe and kinda dig their consumer protection laws. But, I feel this is a step too far.
Shouldnt it be the carriers' responsibility to keep their networks up? Did Apple force them to carry the iPhone, did their sales not go through the roof with the iPhone, have they not considered taking the massive profit theyre making from the iPhone to update their networks.
What if a company has a bomb, lets pick on Microsoftwill Microsoft get away with not subsidizing the carriers?
Shouldnt the carriers had negotiated this before hand?
