Well, that's deprioritize rather than throttle, and realistically that would apply to essentially any carrier (not just now or in the future but also in the past).
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.
T-Mobile ONE Unlimited Plan Gains HD Video and 10GB High-Speed Hotspot Data to One-Up Verizon
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wow, used almost 20GBs, good for you!
But thanks for ranting instead of trying to answer my question, which was sincere by the way.
For 2 lines its 50.00 difference and I would push the button for even 5.00 difference. Thats beyond lazy, who dials your phone for you?
Not to mention verizon is a no go anyway with their lack of north america roaming.
[doublepost=1487041454][/doublepost]
Pure dishonest bs. Your post was a statement, a rant and really even a whine. So at least be honest.
Good for you, but this is a whining rant. Seem to feel they definitely NEED unlimited data? Like you know eneryone elses access to wifi? The question you mention came as a distant second after the condescending, ranting whine. But good for you, 500mb. Why even have a smart phone? Seriously? Either that or you camp out under wifi al day. Not everyone does, accept it. Don't whine about it. Jeezus.
Last edited:
I called today about this new plan. I'm currently on grandfathered plan Simple Choice. $80 for Unlimited plus $10 for 5GB tablet. For me I would only save taxes, $80 would go to $70 but $10 would go to $20 for unlimited data tablet plan. You still pay taxes on insurance I was told. Plus I have 2 device payments. I was told I would save only about $7 in taxes a month. So bill would go from $176 to $169. I'm still considering but weighing the decision. Is it worth it, only gaining extra 3 GB hotspot and going to unlimited tablet plan from 5GB.
Are the big four experiencing that much churn causing them to sharpen their plans? There seems to be a lot of improvement lately. Of course we owe this mostly to T-mob and John Legere who started it all.
A good solid signal wherever your feet take you is still more important than a good deal though.
A good solid signal wherever your feet take you is still more important than a good deal though.
Last edited:
You just won the internet, keyboard warrior!
"90% feel like they need unlimited data" = pure observation
"I find that funny" = I still find it odd/strange, that there are not more than 1-2 persons here who say they wouldn't need unlimited data.
There was no freaking statement about if those people really need the unlimited data, because I simply don't care. If somebody's condescending here, it's you.
No, that's not just what throttling means, there's more to it. And that's also difference between it and deprioritization as well. Details matter.
I'll be checking this out on Friday. It might finally beat the grandfathered plan I have now. Nice move, T-Mo!
Wow everyone CALM DOWN! When I first moved to Los Angeles from the UK, I was on T-Mobile. Let me tell you, they offered the best price tag but the service absolutely blew!! You could get some pretty good service but only if you were outdoors unobstructed holding your iPhone above your head and standing on your tip-toes. The second you went inside, it cut to one bar and the speeds slowed to a halt! Dropped calls were also a frequent issue. I then moved to AT&T which was a lot better, but SERIOUSLY since I moved to VERIZON, the service has been night-and-day better!! No joke! I know it depends on the city, but Verizon really has the #1 spot in my books!
Well worth the $10 difference in my books! I appreciate Legere for the work he has done in shaking up the industry but T-Mobile is not a resilient network. It just isn't.
Well worth the $10 difference in my books! I appreciate Legere for the work he has done in shaking up the industry but T-Mobile is not a resilient network. It just isn't.
Once a month I can handle. No ideal, but far superior to DAILY. Ugh.
[doublepost=1487048999][/doublepost]
The reason people are splitting hairs with the terminology is that there isn't a set data cap at which you will always receive a throttle. This may be clear to you, but when discussin these things in a public forum, it can get confusing. So, IMO, it is important to be specific. In the way the carriers use the term, deprioritization (throttling when congested) isn't the same as throttling (done 100% of the time after a certain data limit has been reached). I don't necesarily disagree in principle with you, but the carriers do make the distinction, and thusly so should we.
[doublepost=1487049196][/doublepost]
When did you move? The last two years have created massive changes. Friend lives in the area and it's great. We also visit 1-2 times a year and have had no issues. Better service than at home (New England) to be honest.
Also worth noting, the price difference for a family of four is about 30 a month ($20 face value plus taxes). That's an iPhone every two years.
Last edited:
Ok, I must be late to the party here, but where exactly am I supposed to go to "opt in" once a month to get this?
I am assuming it is where the standard binge on is. I don't recall off the top of my head but logging into your account and looking at features should get you where you need to be.
I don't know if someone replied to you, so many comments...But the $20 is a "line access fee" for those not in a two year contract. It's $40 for those in a two year contract. That's why device payment is actually cheaper in the long run, and one reason they got rid of the 2 years altogether. Not by much, but it's about $100 cheaper than what the 2 years cost over the course of 2 years.
Blessed is T-mobile for taking the high road of competition over the nefarious temptations of oligopoly. But I would rather have HD Voice, than HD video. Call quality is really lagging, and it suffers when bandwidth is prioritized for data. The ubiquity of wifi is making outliers like HD voice all the more potent as a point of differentiation. It certainly speaks to me.
[doublepost=1487053297][/doublepost]
I think most people just want fee-less data, rather than unlimited data. A Pay per MB model may be quite attractive, and even incentivize users to put less superfluous strain on the network.
[doublepost=1487053297][/doublepost]
I think most people just want fee-less data, rather than unlimited data. A Pay per MB model may be quite attractive, and even incentivize users to put less superfluous strain on the network.
It won't be until it kicks in on friday.
Not sure if it will be where you turn off binge on or under options where you currently opt in for hd right now. The monthly hasn't started yet so is not there.......
Does anyone know if the max unlimited and throttling on Verizon is specific to each line or if it's based off the sum of all lines (i.e. Shared)?
I currently have an XL plan with 4 lines. So I'm allowed ~24GB shared. The price is basically the same, trying to see if it makes sense to switch.
I currently have an XL plan with 4 lines. So I'm allowed ~24GB shared. The price is basically the same, trying to see if it makes sense to switch.
Throttling means slowing the speeds down, "de-prioritizing" means they are defining WHO gets throttled.
Don't kid yourself, it's in the best interest of every carrier to re-define "prioritizing." These companies, including T-Mobile, are in it to make money, they're not looking for our best interest.
Throttling, as it has been applied in the wireless carrier industry, has generally been in reference to dropping to a set low speed essentially once some particular point and staying at that consistently until another particular and somewhat arbitrary point usually down the line (when a billing cycle is over, for example).
Deprioritization is something that happens only when connected to a particularly congested cell/tower and would apply only up to the duration of the congestion and only on that cell/tower. It also doesn't just lock to particular very low speed and nothing more that that, it simply prioritizes the connection lower than that of others who are not deprioritized, meaning that even when it's in effect the speeds can very well be quite fast, simply not at the full potential capacity that some others might be getting connected to that cell/tower.
So, just because people don't think there's a difference or don't care that there is one or don't want to acknowledge it because of some principle, or something else of that nature, it doesn't mean that there's no difference or that the difference doesn't really matter.
There's no confusion on my part, and I know what you are saying.
When the carriers say they will "de-prioritize," fine. The problem is not knowing what is "congestion" and what triggers "de-prioritizing." Again, they're in it to take as much money away from our wallets as possible, that's capitalism. What's not fine is this arbitrary, "we'll tell you what's congested," BS they're dispensing.
They know exactly how much they are going to get from each customer....heck, they take our social security numbers to make sure they get it -- why can't us consumers know what and when we're going to get?
What is it that we would need to know? What would make anything different and in what way?
It boils down to whether you trust giant, faceless, jingoistic publicly-traded companies. And when there are arbitrary, "clear as mud" metrics being dispensed from them, it makes sense to assume the worst.