Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I just ported over 2 lines from AT&T yesterday on the current Unlimted 4G LTE Simple Choice Plan which includes 14GB of tethering per line. It's $140 per month before taxes & fees. How much would the new plan be if I were to add $25 per line the Unlimited tethering and unlimited HD video streaming?

70+50+25+25 and you have to toggle HD video every day you watch Netflix, etc.
New plans are more expensive.
 
If you're in an area that's hardly congested, then you probably don't be de-prioritized, and can use tons of data at high speeds. I think most people reading "de-prioritized at 26GB" phrase as "immediately throttled to death," which isn't the case for most people.

Yea, the throttling will probably depend on a lot of factors; although I could see them automatically slowing you down simply to make it easier to manage bandwidth use, based on estimated, not actual network usage. For example, if they know network demand goes up significantly at certain times throttling back heavy users helps ensure the spike in demand doesn't result in poorer performance overall as the start throttling some users since they would have already increased the headroom.
[doublepost=1472489308][/doublepost]
70+50+25+25 and you have to toggle HD video every day you watch Netflix, etc.
New plans are more expensive.
Unless you are using Airplay to watch the video what advantage is HD on an iPad, let alone an iPhone is the actual improvement in picture worth the extra money? I watch videos on my iPad and compress movies to around 2GB max and they are quite watchable with no noticeable video artifacts that disrupt viewing.
 
Yea, the throttling will probably depend on a lot of factors; although I could see them automatically slowing you down simply to make it easier to manage bandwidth use, based on estimated, not actual network usage. For example, if they know network demand goes up significantly at certain times throttling back heavy users helps ensure the spike in demand doesn't result in poorer performance overall as the start throttling some users since they would have already increased the headroom.

Deprioritization IS NOT throttling. Deprioritization is bumping your network traffic to a lower-priority queue so that other users can get a bite. Higher priority traffic goes first, then you. If there's no higher priority traffic ahead of you, you won't even notice. If you're not in a congested area, there won't even be any deprioritization.

Tip: read up on quality of service (QoS) to get an idea about how this works.
 
They need to start investing in better coverage before any gimmicky deal will have me consider changing.
T-Mobile, being the 4th 3rd largest carrier, sure does push the industry forward with its special offers and ground-breaking ideas for service plans. I think without them, the big 3 wouldn't be looking at some of the plans they do offer and we'd be worse off for it.

Maybe, but it would be nice if they could back up these outstanding plans with outstanding service. Even simple things like, oh I don't know, seeing plan details on their website. Coverage improvements would be nice too. Just something as simple as using a plan on an iPad isn't so simple.
 
Deprioritization IS NOT throttling. Deprioritization is bumping your network traffic to a lower-priority queue so that other users can get a bite. Higher priority traffic goes first, then you. If there's no higher priority traffic ahead of you, you won't even notice. If you're not in a congested area, there won't even be any deprioritization.

Tip: read up on quality of service (QoS) to get an idea about how this works.

True, and I may not have been clear in my comment. I did not mean that deprioritization is throttling, and thus should not have used the term throttling since I did not mean as a technical term, in that the network is looking at congestion and throttling back heavy users. Rather, it is managing users based on separating heavy users from normal or light users and using that designation to decide what level of service to provide. By tagging heavy users at some central location and letting local nodes do the deprioritizing you've made managing the network easier than if you tried to manage congestions locally. You can id heavy users and apply the algorithm to them without having to identify congested areas since the system will adjust to available bandwidth; thereby minimizing the hit on normal users without having to completely throttle heavy ones?

Even in a non-congested node the algorithms can still reprioritize someone labeled as a heavy user, it's just they will see very little impact of such actions; while they may have no impact simply because a node is not congested doesn't mean that the heavy user won't be dropped from LT to 4G for periods of time. While they may not notice any difference doesn't mean they aren't having their traffic managed to allow normal users to not be significantly affected by the heavy users.
 
I am pretty happy with AT&T great coverage where I live - $74.00 /month w/4GB/mth never use more than 2GB
If I needed more than one line and a lot of DATA it would make more sense to switch. Everyone's needs are so different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: max2
Certainly an improvement over the original announcement. 512Kbps tethering may still sound bad, but it's far more usable than 128Kbps.
Certainty - unlimited 128k save my butt while on vacation on Cozumel, Grand Cayman and Jamaica - was able to borrow a laptop and remotely solved some issue at work without problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: extrachrispy
T-Mobile, being the 4th 3rd largest carrier, sure does push the industry forward with its special offers and ground-breaking ideas for service plans. I think without them, the big 3 wouldn't be looking at some of the plans they do offer and we'd be worse off for it.
Very much agreed. I'm still with Verizon for the time being, but I love the effect that T-Mobile is having on the industry.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: imlynxy and S.B.G
Even in a non-congested node the algorithms can still reprioritize someone labeled as a heavy user, it's just they will see very little impact of such actions; while they may have no impact simply because a node is not congested doesn't mean that the heavy user won't be dropped from LT to 4G for periods of time. While they may not notice any difference doesn't mean they aren't having their traffic managed to allow normal users to not be significantly affected by the heavy users.

No, that is not how it works. They will still be on LTE. It's just that everyone else's packets get to go first.

This isn't unlike planes queueing up for takeoff, then a higher priority flight gets to jump the line (or your plane gets sent to the end of the line). Your plane still takes off at the exact same speed; it just has to wait longer to do it.
 
No, that is not how it works. They will still be on LTE. It's just that everyone else's packets get to go first.

Interesting. From what I've read they can implement it in a number of ways, from introducing delays, dropping packets or dropping heavy user traffic to lower speeds to allow higher priority traffic to move across the network.


This isn't unlike planes queueing up for takeoff, then a higher priority flight gets to jump the line (or your plane gets sent to the end of the line). Your plane still takes off at the exact same speed; it just has to wait longer to do it.

However, that reduces the overall average speed since while you may still have the same burst speed you have introduced an overall delay in the time it takes to get from A to B. I guess it all comes down to how you measure speed.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.