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.
Verizon to Begin Spot Throttling of High-Usage Customers on Unlimited LTE Plans
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I get it all to well. We just disagree about what you actually are entitled to with the "unlimited" plan and what would still be within the terms of it. There is a difference in that. But that's alright, we can agree to disagree, as that's about as far as it would get ultimately.
I said all of the companies have local monopolies, not that all areas are covered by one of those local monopolies.
Anyways, Comcast doesn't advertise or offer unlimited, but most people act like they do (including me). Technically you're limited to half a terabyte per month on a consumer plan (not sure what they limit you to if you're on a business plan) but I've never come even remotely close to that, despite watching quite a bit of Netflix each month. Basically they're just looking to avoid have users run data centers off of the home plans.
I think it was 250 GB or 350 GB but they stopped enforcing the cap some time ago, although there was some talk about the caps changing and being enforced once again.
I just moved out of my parents house and had to sign up for Comcast internet. In the small print I saw 500 GB was the monthly limit.
The only crap they are dealing with is from dumb dumb users that don't understand the difference between an OS and internet service
And you talk like it's cheap to provide service etc. It's not. The only way that Apple could possibly do what you want is if they were to fiber up everywhere and fill everywhere with a mesh of interconnected free wifi hotspots and cell towers. Which is costly to build, costly to rent from others and the paperwork and regulations are intense. If you don't believe me then go try to do it yourself. And worldwide. Apple would have to spend every penny in the bank and you can bet it wouldn't come cheap to the consumers. Apple does have to make a profit after all. Unless you want them to halt all research etc on hardware and software upgrades for a decade or so
Sorry, you're right. They do all have local monopolies. They probably mostly have some very high limit, but someone in my family has "unlimited" DSL that, if you read the fine print, charges you extra if you go over a pretty achievable limit. Like if you use 1mbps downstream constantly for a month, you'll go over. But it's really crappy and drops for a minute every 30 minutes (or less sometimes), so whatever is using 1mbps would have to reconnect itself repeatedly.
My Business Class account has no caps, and I'm on a separate node from my neighbors - when their internet tanks or goes down, my connection is running at the same 50/10. I've considered terminating it a few times but the ETF is pretty steep, and the residential lines of my neighbors have gone down about a dozen times this year already...
----------
My sister in FLA and a friend in San Diego had soft caps of 300GB put on their accounts a few months ago - trial caps is what they were called. Sis dropped Comcast and went to U-Verse and my friend switched to SONIC.net - problem solved.
So, I read with some disdain about the impending throttling of my remaining UL data lines and I'm not happy about it. I'm glad that the abusers will be throttled, but I don't want my lines capped in any way. The only two towers serving my area are near Interstate 5, which carries about 100k travelers on it each day. I have never abused my data usage, and neither have my employees.
I guess what frosts me, using Comcast's Business Class ISP analogy - $110 per month gets me UL data, and their residential accounts get maybe $75 for 300GB - so for that same 300GB Verizon (and other wireless carriers!) could charge $20 per GB - that's $6000 for what their ISP charges to VZW maybe $100. That kind of markup should be illegal. The $30 dollars per line I pay maybe costs VZW about $1, and I bought my phones outright.
Yeah, VZW paid billions for the 700 spectrum, but then they sat on much of it for 2-4 years. And, when VZW sold some of that spectrum to USCC or T-Mo, our bills didn't go down, right?
So, I'm considering other carriers, but ATTWS is really the only other carrier in the PNW that has decent coverage alongside VZW. And, I'm going to look into the Best Buy loophole too. None of my rant is going to make any difference, but VZW is likely going to miss out on a couple grand a month when I take my business elsewhere - but not too much...
I guess what frosts me, using Comcast's Business Class ISP analogy - $110 per month gets me UL data, and their residential accounts get maybe $75 for 300GB - so for that same 300GB Verizon (and other wireless carriers!) could charge $20 per GB - that's $6000 for what their ISP charges to VZW maybe $100. That kind of markup should be illegal. The $30 dollars per line I pay maybe costs VZW about $1, and I bought my phones outright.
Yeah, VZW paid billions for the 700 spectrum, but then they sat on much of it for 2-4 years. And, when VZW sold some of that spectrum to USCC or T-Mo, our bills didn't go down, right?
So, I'm considering other carriers, but ATTWS is really the only other carrier in the PNW that has decent coverage alongside VZW. And, I'm going to look into the Best Buy loophole too. None of my rant is going to make any difference, but VZW is likely going to miss out on a couple grand a month when I take my business elsewhere - but not too much...
I work for Verizon Wireless. Some of you don't realize that unlimited data costs the company a fortune.
One of the biggest, richest enemies of Net Neutrality sells their bandwidth as "Unlimited", then limits that bandwidth when they actually have to provide what their customers thought they were buying?
You don't say.
You don't say.
They advertise unlimited data, not unlimited bandwidth. The bandwidth is already limited anyway to whatever the pipe can handle, and they'll decrease it extra if you start abusing it.
Somehow, when the company is raking in ~4bn/Q and still providing **** serivce, that excuse doesn't really pull any heartstings.
If they were making far less money or provided far better serivce, maybe. But the fact of the matter is that Verizon has some of the worst plans out there, and they rely upon people's laziness to retain customers. The only way my plan is even remotely competitive is that I get a 20% discount, otherwise I'd have left years ago.
Until Verizon charges far less for data, I don't think they're going to get much sympathy.
You can still have as many refills as you want but only once every 5 minutes. That's still unlimited by definition.
These plans are still unlimited data usage, just speed throttled for heavy users. Still unlimited. ****** practise, but yes, unlimited.
Abusing it, you mean, using it as it it were... unlimited?
Now what ever could have given people the idea they could do that?
So if someone has some plan where they pay a flat fee for their water and therefore get "unlimited" amount of it, that means they could just turn it on and leave it permanently running since hey they get unlimited, right?
----------
Why does Verizon provide crappy service? Seems like for a lot of people that's not the case.
----------
Its not unlimited enough apparently. People don't want to just be able to use as much data as they can but as fast as they can, thinking that the unlimited part applies to the speed as well apparently, even though that wasn't part of the service they signed up for when they got unlimited data.
Sorry, I was only talking about the home accounts. I have a pretty rock solid connection with my home account. I run VNC and test a social network off of it.
Must be nice to not live within a local monopoly. Comcast is my only option for TV and internet (well, I can get Dish for TV, but no one else will provide internet, and Comcast's TV prices are cheaper after bundling with internet.) They're also my only option for a land-line, but I've been cellular only without an issue since moving out of my parents house.
I don't know, especially since it says in their papers that they may be throttled if they use it too much. They can still use it as much as they want, even when it's throttled.
This has nothing to do with anything other than pure greed - lust for money. Verizon knows more people are using data over phone calls. And Verizon was instrumental in getting the net neutrality campaign squashed: we're the losers on this one.
Think of it as the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. Verizon has shareholders so they have to continually find ways of extracting every penny from the pockets of their subscribers. The good news is this will come back to bite them eventually.
Apple has a far higher profit margin than Verizon or AT&T. And still people direct all their hate against the "greedy" operators. Why is that? They spent tens of billions of dollars over the last few years to build out the nationwide infrastructure and enable all the bandwidth-hungry applications we use today. Without them, you wouldn't be able to watch Netflix on a phone or stream hours of music per day from Spotify. Remember what kind of speeds we had just a few years ago?
Yes, and the fact that more and more people use over-the-top services rather then the operators' (the profits of which used to support network buildout) is part of the reason why they have to think about new business models. With data, they bear all the cost to build and maintain the transport infrastructure, while the Googles and Netflixes of the world rake in huge profit margins on their back.
And Apple is different how?