Only my opinion, but I feel people streaming 15+ gb a month are abusng their service. I strongly believe if a lot of folks hadn't gone crazy with the AT&T unlimited right out of the gate, maybe ATT wouldn't have dropped the plan so fast.
Another way to abuse the service: jailbreak, and use your iPad as a hot spot for all the other computers in your house, racking up unbelievable data usage.
No guilt, only the feeling of being responsible for my actions. If I go to a buffet, I don't pig out just because it says "all you can eat".
No, AT&T would have dropped the unlimited data plan regardless.
AT&T said:
June 02, 2010
Currently, 65 percent of AT&T smartphone customers use less than 200 MB of data per month on average.
Currently, 98 percent of AT&T smartphone customers use less than 2 GB of data a month on average.
http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=17991&cdvn=news&newsarticleid=30854
Straight from the horses mouth. Note the date, this is
before they started to throttle.
So if only 2% use more than 2gb monthly, how exactly is unlimited data being abused? 15+gb a month is nothing.
"Bandwidth is simply a measure of the amount of data that can be transmitted through a connection over a given amount of time."
So your abusive example of 15+gb/month turns out to be 0.75 mbps. Hardly any abuse IMO.
Don't even get me started on tethering. It's simply enabling the device, which already has the ability by design, to share the data service that you are paying for, unlimited or tiered. Are you not allowed to have more than one home phone, utilizing the same number? Are you not allowed to have more than one light bulb in your household? Are you not allowed to have more than one computer on your home Internet?
Being required to pay extra to allow that service is a clear restriction of use. Use of the service that you are already paying for. This is pretty much the wireless provider double dipping into your $$$ pockets. I'm surprised there hasn't been a class action lawsuit brought up against it yet.
You may not pig out at a "all u can eat" buffet but there are others who require and consume more food than you no? As equal paying customers, are they not entitled to eat more than average?