Compare the land mass, population density, infrastructure, etc.
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 Lift Video Streaming Restrictions for Unlimited Plans With Extra $10/Month Payment
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Meanwhile, T-Mobile let you do this for free via your user web portal.that sounds awesome.
good thing they restricted the quality so they can then offer you to pay more for better quality.
Superb!
[doublepost=1509001952][/doublepost]
How much do people make on average in you country in eastern EU? $1500 per month, if that.
[doublepost=1509002047][/doublepost]
You should get around some.
[doublepost=1509002801][/doublepost]
You are selling their top execs way too short.
I'd think that more people = more clients = more money. T-Mobile is also in all EU ****ries making for >300 millions of people. The fact is you don't get this unlimited data for whole EU, but if you stay in your "state" it's that cheap.
Yes, around this (sadly). But still price to value is better even if you take into consideration average income. Just buying new phones hurts
. Seriously imagine if iPhone X costed $5000 in USA. Who would have bought it? And in my country lots of people will actually shove this amount of money (income wise) to Apple tomorrow.
I do not know why anyone would chose these carries over prepaid at this point. The restrictions are just ridiculous.
Wow...for $10 more, you can get what you thought you were already paying for...classy Verizon...
As an original grandfathered plan holder (remember the Thunderbolt?) I struggled with giving it up. But I jumped to T-Mobile on their all-in deal and could not be happier. The thing that actually made my mind up was T-Mobile allowing unlimited data and calls on LTE in Canada and 3G data in a lot of other places. I travel to Canada and the UK for work and it makes a huge difference.
I guess the moral of my story is not necessarily VZ's nickle & diming for the package but rather T-Mobile's disruptive view of the industry.
FWIW
DLM
Yes, that's exactly what they do, though it's not the (only) reason they do it. There's a setting on the car to choose what percentage it'll charge to. I believe it defaults to 90%, but you can slide it up or down (and the percentage you set is multiplied by the percentage your battery is locked to by Tesla.)
“ Your limits are limited on our unlimited, but our unlimited unlimited is not limited”.
That's the thing, it's not as simplistic as that. And to top it all off there's a difference in cost and in living and salaries and all that too. Look at the cost of something like gasoline or many other products or services that can be much more expensive somewhere and much cheaper in US.I'd think that more people = more clients = more money. T-Mobile is also in all EU ****ries making for >300 millions of people. The fact is you don't get this unlimited data for whole EU, but if you stay in your "state" it's that cheap.
Yes, around this (sadly). But still price to value is better even if you take into consideration average income. Just buying new phones hurts
HA!!! No it won't. THere's not enough competition. And all the carriers will do this. There isn't a perfectly competitive market, so the thinking that the free market will correct this is simply wrong.
Great Britain = 93,628 sq miles
United States = 3,794,100 sq miles
Just one factor to consider
[doublepost=1509026586][/doublepost]
you're not implying that there's some sort of free market in telecommunications are you? there hasn't really been one since the airwaves were nationalized in 1927. monopolies and duopolies are the product of government, not markets.
Part of the reason you pay less for cell service in the EU, I think, is that there are more people in the EU in total than there are in the U.S. The latest census data I could find shows 508 million people in the EU. That's roughly 200 million more people than we have in the U.S. Sure, not all of those people have cell phones, but the vast majority of them do.
You have less infrastructure needed in the EU because the land mass of the EU is nowhere near the size of the U.S., and you have more people who are paying for cell service in the EU compared to the U.S. Therefore, the cost of cell service in the EU should be lower than it is in the U.S.
This is inaccurate. They CAN throttle you but it's not a guarantee. I'm on ATT, and currently at 32GB data used in 10 days -- I'm not being throttled at all -- because where I'm at there are few ATT customers and no congestion.
Here's an idea to "solve" net neutrality and a lot of this marketing nonsense - all carriers should get rid of unlimited and go to a "pay what you use" business model. Just charge a set price for each gig, no matter how much or how little you use. Speed is a non-factor here, everyone can choose how quickly or slowly the bits are consumed but if you consume more bits faster, you'll just get charged more. Thus if you choose to watch Netflix in 4k on your phone via a cell connection, you'll be paying more than someone who is willing to watch Netflix in 480p - but that choice is left up to the customer.
I would guess that network usage follows something like an 80/20 model (20% of population uses 80% of all data). The idea of an unlimited data plan is kind of absurd and it's really just a marketing tool. It's the reason why all of these games are being played by the carriers of throttling speed, data caps, etc.
The whole net neutrality question is only b/c heavy data usage via Netflix and other video streaming are pitted against other types of data usage. As someone said, a bit is a bit, and thus a customer should just be charged by how many bits they use and not where the bit is coming from - that is what net neutrality is.
Am I missing something here? Seems fairly straightforward and is a "free market" solution here.
I would guess that network usage follows something like an 80/20 model (20% of population uses 80% of all data). The idea of an unlimited data plan is kind of absurd and it's really just a marketing tool. It's the reason why all of these games are being played by the carriers of throttling speed, data caps, etc.
The whole net neutrality question is only b/c heavy data usage via Netflix and other video streaming are pitted against other types of data usage. As someone said, a bit is a bit, and thus a customer should just be charged by how many bits they use and not where the bit is coming from - that is what net neutrality is.
Am I missing something here? Seems fairly straightforward and is a "free market" solution here.
It's 2017... how are they still coming up with new schemes for data plans?
This shouldn't be that difficult. Bits are bits. Let me use them.
Imagine if voice plans in the old days were done like this:
"You have 600 minutes a month... but only a portion of them can be used during mornings... and another portion can only be used for calls longer than 5 minutes... and another portion can only be used for ordering take-out food..."
Dang... now that I think about it... remember the "free calls after 9pm" nonsense?
I guess everything comes back around.
Shhh....don't give them any ideas.
My old BellSouth/Cingular/AT&T plans had weirdo features like this. The first was unlimited nights & weekends, if I remember correctly. That originally started at 7pm, but gradually got pushed to 8 and then 9pm. That may have retired that feature when they went to plans with Rollover Minutes. What they offered instead was unlimited calling to 5 designated numbers - A-List?
I thought the reason for throttling was to save the Internet from people using a scarce resource, bandwidth. Turns out, they just made it scarce so they could sell it off to anybody with an extra 10 bucks.
I don't even know why so many of you are up in arms about this. You can easily see a difference in quality from 480 to 720. No question about that. But anything over 720p on a 5" device will look very similar to 4K. You are out of your mind if you pay them money just so you can say you have 4K streaming. Even in a home with a 65" 4K TV, you need to sit no further than 10 feet from your screen to see the benefit of 4K. Beyond that and you might as well enjoy watching a 1080p screen. The differences are negligible. Save your money.
This is a useful tool for restricting the bandwidth used. Data networks were simply not made for streaming video at all, much less 1080p and 4k video, which is completely useless on a phone. The Go Unlimited Plan is crippled, and Verizon should be ashamed of it, because of the built-in depri, which is unique amongst all the carriers. The additional MHS and lack of depri makes the Beyond Unlimited the best choice, but even 720p is really not needed on a phone.
I have a metered AT&T plan, and they turned on their stream saver thing to stream at 480p automatically. I could turn it off, since I'm metered, but I don't, as 480p is more than enough for streaming on a phone, and it uses less data, doesn't chew through as much battery, and keeps the phone cooler. If you want to watch 4k video, do it in your living room.
It's all an ARPU game. They can make more money selling you Unlimited since it *seems* like a better value, even though it's actually worse than their old 12+2GB plan, which was the best offered, like AT&T's 15/20GB MSV plan. The prices have gone up, while creating the illusion of "value".
This in turn has created massive bloat on websites and apps so everything uses WAY more mobile data than it should, and thus pay per MB schemes like Google Fi aren't a good deal anymore. It's unfortunate, as the mobile web and apps are now a bloated mess, and some apps, like Snapchat, won't even run on a 128kbps connection. We'd be much better off if every app and mobile web page were designed for a 128kbps connection with heavy compression, then faster connections would just be gravy. 4G LTE is important for spectral efficiency, and low latency is great, but we really have no use for more than the bandwidth of a 2G connection except for bloat.
I have a metered AT&T plan, and they turned on their stream saver thing to stream at 480p automatically. I could turn it off, since I'm metered, but I don't, as 480p is more than enough for streaming on a phone, and it uses less data, doesn't chew through as much battery, and keeps the phone cooler. If you want to watch 4k video, do it in your living room.
It's all an ARPU game. They can make more money selling you Unlimited since it *seems* like a better value, even though it's actually worse than their old 12+2GB plan, which was the best offered, like AT&T's 15/20GB MSV plan. The prices have gone up, while creating the illusion of "value".
This in turn has created massive bloat on websites and apps so everything uses WAY more mobile data than it should, and thus pay per MB schemes like Google Fi aren't a good deal anymore. It's unfortunate, as the mobile web and apps are now a bloated mess, and some apps, like Snapchat, won't even run on a 128kbps connection. We'd be much better off if every app and mobile web page were designed for a 128kbps connection with heavy compression, then faster connections would just be gravy. 4G LTE is important for spectral efficiency, and low latency is great, but we really have no use for more than the bandwidth of a 2G connection except for bloat.
Is that for a smartphone though? Or just flip-phones?
But let's be honest... that's not their most popular plan. Look at how much AT&T touts their 4G LTE coverage.
Yes... they still have voice-only plans...
But they are primarily a DATA company nowadays... which was my point.