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.
All iPads Ouch AT&T data plans
- Thread starter iSensei
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I got a mobile share plan for my Phone service and it's just 10 bucks a month to add an iPad.
free tether and Facetime over cellular
free tether and Facetime over cellular
I'd rather get 3GB for $30 than be forced into Verizon's ridiculously expensive share everything plans when I'm the only person on the account.
if I didn't have unlimited data I would no longer pay for any data plan. They are ridiculous ripoffs
Seems a bit hypocritical to buy a top of the line smartphone, then complain about operating costs. That's like buying an ultra high performance car, only to complain about fuel & insurance costs.
But then again, in AppleLand it's fashionable to be consistently hypocritical.
But then again, in AppleLand it's fashionable to be consistently hypocritical.
Very true! Apple fans are the first ones to go the mat defending Apple's profit margins and premium pricing...but will grab their torches and pitchforks if the cell companies raise their cost $.01. My favorite are the people who feel lifelong $30/unlimited data is a constitutional right....but will defend Apple for charging $329 for an under spec iPad Mini just so they can maintain huge profit margins.
Bad analogy.
If you buy a cheap smartphone you'll still pay the same as a high end smartphone for the data plan.
ok by that logic... average price of iphone $300... average verizon data plan after taxes $150/mo (conservative estimate)
average price of supercar $400,000, so people should expect to pay $200,000/mo in operating costs???
very hypocritical
What's hypocritical is them charging you separate data plans for separate devices, when they all use the same data. Should be able to use however many devices on whatever data you are paying for. Pretty ****** to charge someone for phone data, then a separate charge for iPad data when the person doesn't even use all of their cell data they paid for, which also doesn't even rollover.
It's also hypocritical to charge people $30 for a required texting plan that uses kilobytes, yes kilobytes of the very same data that should just be part of the data plan.
Cell companies are scum.
Kudos for an excellent post
It's refreshing to hear the voice of intelligence, truth, and common sense.
Kudos for an excellent post
It's refreshing to hear the voice of intelligence, truth, and common sense.
Amazon gives free 3 or 4G with its Kindles in America if I'm not mistaken?
Not exactly. You pay extra up front for a 3G version that will only get you Wikipedia and the amazon store, maybe one other site. Everything else is blocked. And an that deal also only applies to e-readers anyway.
Assumption? No, they are scum. If you don't think so, you probably work for them. However, what they do to get around laws and try and overcharge is pretty easy to see.
Also, WTH is the deal with the activation/upgrade fee? $36 to press a button that says inactive to active? Whatever software is involved in that, it's not $36 worth.
You have to look at how the cell business has evolved to understand the pricing structure. There have always been set costs for cell companies and bit of a shell game of what we pay for.
As little as 15 years ago the entire industry was based on voice coverage. We all paid a $40-$50 a month for 60-100 minutes per month with extra minutes running 25-40 cents a MINUTE. Texting and data use were not on anyone's radar.
The big arms race was each company trying to provide truly national coverage (remember when we were all in regional cell networks) and the big switch to 'digital' service. The fees we paid back then were used to build out the networks.
As the networks matured, the prices seemed to stabalize and packages grew a lot more competitive (friends and family, 10 wireless numbers for free, rollover, etc.)
The data phone explosion set off the second arms race where cell companies raced to build nationwide 3G then LTE/4G coverage. Someone had to pay the freight on that. The model shifted to data. And now cell phone companies have to create plans that bring in that revenue via data costs.
If the costs are X dollars per subscriber, it doesn't matter how you divvy it up - they are going to build plans that bring in that amount. AT&T wasn't giving rollover minutes to be nice...they realized that minutes used had stagnated...and if they hit users with other fees (family messaging rates, add on, data plans) they would get that money back. They aren't going to create rollover data, unless they do it in a way that insures the save revenue is coming in.
The most equitable way to charge for data would be to actually charge for usage...similar to a public utility...but there is no way the public will stand for that.
I do think there may be some relief on the horizon. At some point high speed data reaches a point of diminishing returns. It's similar to home internet. Once you can get 20-30 MB/s download speeds, do you really need anything faster? If the equipment upgrade arms race slows down, those infrastructure costs slow down as well. At that point the cell companies will be compelled to compete on price...which will be good for us as consumers.
Not really, when you see the plans are getting more and more expensive while offering less.
There was a time they offered unlimited data for $30 or so.
That's in the past. I welcome you to roll back time
It's no different than other products & services we buy. With the passing of time, everything goes up in price, its only a problem if it can be fixed.
If it can't, then it falls into the category called: it's a fact of life.
Okay, two points.
First, in the phone companies' defense, while it's true that data plans seem to be getting more expensive, not less, part of that is that with the vast growth in cellular data use they are getting hit with fairly massive infrastructure improvement costs. They have to make that up somewhere. Further, if you compare the cost of, for example, the iPhone with and without subsidy, the difference is $699 vs $199 for the 16GB iPhone 5. Now, $500 vs $30 per month amounts to almost 17 months of your data plan go straight to paying for your subsidy. The remaining 7 months on your contract have to cover the data network maintenance and expansion. Now, I know it's not that simple, but that is very much a part of it.
Second, leaping right from where I left off, is the issue of people who are out from under contracts. My wife and I have been AT&T customers for then years. The majority of that time we have not been under contract (mainly because I've not been all that excited by the phones they have, so we end up getting unlocked phones at full retail price, when we do upgrade, which has been maybe two or three times). We would love to get iPhones, but, for budget issues as much as anything else, we won't. Now, if we could get used, unlocked an iPhone 3Gs or 4, then have a reduced price data plan (say $20 per month for 1GB of shared data between us - after all, we live around copious amounts of wifi, so we don't need data all that often) that was only available to people who were not on a subsidy-imposed contract, we'd jump at the chance. This would be perfect for us. Unfortunately, this is an example of the kind of customer service that the cell companies don't seem interested in giving. Honestly, while we're overall satisfied with AT&T, if Verizon were to offer something like this, we'd honestly consider switching companies. But, as I said, this seems like the kind of service that the phone companies aren't interested in offering.
First, in the phone companies' defense, while it's true that data plans seem to be getting more expensive, not less, part of that is that with the vast growth in cellular data use they are getting hit with fairly massive infrastructure improvement costs. They have to make that up somewhere. Further, if you compare the cost of, for example, the iPhone with and without subsidy, the difference is $699 vs $199 for the 16GB iPhone 5. Now, $500 vs $30 per month amounts to almost 17 months of your data plan go straight to paying for your subsidy. The remaining 7 months on your contract have to cover the data network maintenance and expansion. Now, I know it's not that simple, but that is very much a part of it.
Second, leaping right from where I left off, is the issue of people who are out from under contracts. My wife and I have been AT&T customers for then years. The majority of that time we have not been under contract (mainly because I've not been all that excited by the phones they have, so we end up getting unlocked phones at full retail price, when we do upgrade, which has been maybe two or three times). We would love to get iPhones, but, for budget issues as much as anything else, we won't. Now, if we could get used, unlocked an iPhone 3Gs or 4, then have a reduced price data plan (say $20 per month for 1GB of shared data between us - after all, we live around copious amounts of wifi, so we don't need data all that often) that was only available to people who were not on a subsidy-imposed contract, we'd jump at the chance. This would be perfect for us. Unfortunately, this is an example of the kind of customer service that the cell companies don't seem interested in giving. Honestly, while we're overall satisfied with AT&T, if Verizon were to offer something like this, we'd honestly consider switching companies. But, as I said, this seems like the kind of service that the phone companies aren't interested in offering.
My wife and I just ditched our iPhones and both of us have wi-fi iPads now until I finish my masters next spring.
I just can't justify the data costs at this point.
I just can't justify the data costs at this point.