Potentially because there's something in relation to that in the agreement that Verizon has with FCC in relation to spectrum it purchased for LTE.
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.
FCC Questions Verizon Plan to Throttle Some Unlimited Data Customers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Let's say that I want to run my air conditioner 24/7. I couldn't, because my bill would be outrageous. Why are people down on cell phone companies for trying to operate the same way?
Seriously. I'm genuinely curious - I fear that my Unlimited Data Plan will be taken away, and I'd like to see holes poked in this reasoning. Go nuts, please.
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not... but I don't pay for "unlimited" electricity at a set price.
Let's say that I want to run my air conditioner 24/7. I couldn't, because my bill would be outrageous. Why are people down on cell phone companies for trying to operate the same way?
Seriously. I'm genuinely curious - I fear that my Unlimited Data Plan will be taken away, and I'd like to see holes poked in this reasoning. Go nuts, please
Not even remotely comparable.
If you want to run your AC 24/7, you can - the power company isn't going to limit how cool you can run it.
On top of that, electricity is a pay-per-use utility. A data plan on the other hand, you get stuck paying for a flat amount of data, and if you don't use it, you receive no credit or rollover but be damn sure if you go over the amount once you're going to pay out the nose for it?
Honestly I don't get why people are bitching about the FCC going after a major carrier for throttling. While I personally find it absurd people are stuck to their phones so much all day that they use a ridiculous amount of data or scheme the system by using their phone as a hotspot for their home internet, I think it's great to see the carriers getting what they deserve here.
One thing that should be pointed out here is that what Verizon is going do be doing isn't even really the same kind of "throttling" that other carriers have been doing (in the sense that Verizon's seems to be better and not as restrictive in comparison).
I don't understand why the FCC is concerned now that Verizon is trying to throttle, yet didn't when the other carriers started doing it?!?
Because the FCC Chairman's Family are all on Grandfathered Verizon Unlimited plans? Na, no way.
I have one with 5gb before throttling, one with 3gb and one with 1gb.
200mb is lame to say the least.
Wheeler can't go after AT&T because only VZW has the C Block. No other carrier does. Thank Google for putting in those protections.
http://verizon-wireless-data.blogspot.com/2014/07/verizon-wireless-illegally-throttling.html
If you're really paying that much, I'm sure you can give Verizon a call and haggle a deal. Standard rates are for standard customers.
I don't understand why the FCC is concerned now that Verizon is trying to throttle, yet didn't when the other carriers started doing it?!?
Cuz they're the biggest and prolly cuz of the scrutiny when they bought up all the 700 MHz
I'm not so sure of that. I've met several public utilities that were customer service disasters. Some are not bad though. Unfortunately putting those companies into the category of "utility" opens up a whole new bag of regulatory worms, and those worms are decades out of date.
If our two political parties weren't so ideologically divided these days, they'd completely overhaul our ancient telecom regulations.
----------
That's not even true anymore. The cost per extra gigabyte at Verizon isn't a whole lot more than the normal cost per gigabyte. Source: http://www.verizonwireless.com/wcms/consumer/shop/shop-data-plans/more-everything.html
Basically you only pay a $5 penalty for not accurate pre-planning each gigabyte. The pre-planned cost is $10/gigabyte, and the exceeded cost is $15/gigabyte. Not a big deal. Certainly not like the old days of long-distance phone bills, which were tightly regulated by the government, and a huge scam.
Lets also remember that any regulation that we put in place is likely to last decades. So lets not make policy based on a desire to get back at some particular company. Business environments change very rapidly, regulatory environments do not.
Isn't ATT is already doing this? I have grandfathered "UN"Limited. This is the first time in last 8 years with ATT (from iPhone 2G days) I crossed 5GB and ATT now throttled me for my remaining billing cycle. So it looks like this has nothing to do with peak period throttling...it is just because they can.
Your brother will be paying them a lot of money to download that 5GB since he only has 2 allotted to him each month. This is how Verizon rationalizes this nonsense.
There's free Wi-Fi hotspots everywhere now. Hell, even US Movie Theaters have free Wi-Fi now - a place where you shouldn't even be using your phone!
It still seems to be somewhat unclear whether it does or doesn't apply to on-contract unlimited users.
As for unlimited vs. tiered and using higher amounts of data, it comes down to a supply vs. demand type of thing, in the case of tiered data there's some incentive for not using more data than needed and penalties for going over data that you paid for, while on unlimited there are no such incentives, and if anything there's potentially an incentive to use up as much as possible since it's unlimited. Since Verizon can't charge overages or increase the price of the no longer available unlimited plans, the incentive to get people from congesting bandwidth who otherwise don't care about data is to put some of these network optimization protocols in place when needed.
I'm surprised AT&T and the like haven't just cancelled their unlimited data plans. I would think that legally they would be able to do so when the contract is up.
Rest assured, AT&T, when the day comes that you end my grandfathered unlimited data plan, I will be switching to another provider!
Rest assured, AT&T, when the day comes that you end my grandfathered unlimited data plan, I will be switching to another provider!
A good reason? I'd dispute that. I think the quality of T-Mobile depends on where you will be using the phone. Some places it might be great, but in others it is beyond pathetic.
I went with T-Mobile on an unlocked iPhone 5s that I purchased directly from Apple. My experience on T-Mobile's network was miserable. I paid $80/month for "unlimited" LTE data, but most of the time I was stuck on 3G and Edge. My time was divided mostly between Sacramento and Los Angeles, and I was rather surprised at how poorly T-Mobile served those major cities.
I also used T-Mobile for about a week in Reno, Nevada, and had great LTE coverage there.
So, even though Verizon's tactics might be questionable, it's possible the company's network is superior to that of T-Mobile.
512Kbps really isn't that slow. Sure it isn't 20Mbps but its a hell of a lot faster than 56Kbps that we had with dial up. In comparison to normal speeds though it can seam slow as ****, I'll give you that. Damn now I'm remembering my original iPhone that was on the Edge network, ouch.
In large cities where T-Mo has a larger foot print I have heard their coverage is OK. Its when you deviate even a little bit from those large cities that the coverage starts to suck. I am not speaking from experience just my understanding of the situation. And that is what is keeping me on AT&T.
And what Verizon is planning to do is way less significant than anything like that.
I really don't see the problem with this. Basically what Verizon is saying is that if the data network slows down because of too much demand, they're going to slow down unlimited users rather than all users.
Of course, Verizon could just increase their bandwidth in heavy traffic areas (which I thought they just did).
But we're not in a situation where there isn't any competition. The users that will be affected are off-contract, so they can leave without difficulty. I'd rather see the FCC investigate cable companies over lack of competition.
Of course, Verizon could just increase their bandwidth in heavy traffic areas (which I thought they just did).
But we're not in a situation where there isn't any competition. The users that will be affected are off-contract, so they can leave without difficulty. I'd rather see the FCC investigate cable companies over lack of competition.
That isn't in anything I've read about their plans for "network optimization".
Data being used is data being used. Money doesn't clear congestion of the towers.
If I pay $45 a month for 6GB of data, I don't get throttled, even if the tower is congested. Now, if I pay $30 a month for unlimited data allowance, and I download 4.8GB of data on that same tower, I get throttled.
So someone on a tiered plan can download more than someone on an unlimited plan, without being throttled.
How the heck is that network optimization?
It's not, plain and simple.
Why is this front page news?
Its nice to know, but it really has no bearing on anything Mac and/or rumor related..
Its nice to know, but it really has no bearing on anything Mac and/or rumor related..
A paltry 4.7GB? That's it? That's about 30.5 PB if I approximated correctly. Doesn't seem like much for a network like Verizon, especially considering that there's another 116 million users in the network. Assuming a 2GB per user average in the 95% window, that's 232 PB. If my estimate of a 2GB average is close, the top 5% probably use around 10% of the total data, which isn't that much to start with. This is child's play compared to a real ISP.