Maybe all the employees can raise $199 for the employer to buy a decent wireless router?
Maybe a bake sale...or a We-Still-Don't-Have-WIFI-And-It's-Almost-2013 Fundraiser? 
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 Support FaceTime over Cellular on iPhone 5, iPhone 4S and New iPad
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Maybe all the employees can raise $199 for the employer to buy a decent wireless router?
Maybe a bake sale...or a We-Still-Don't-Have-WIFI-And-It's-Almost-2013 Fundraiser? Also, grandparents. Got my grandparents in India an iPad, now we video chat like it's the 21 century.
They're just going to smile and laugh as you zip through that data on 4G Facetime with a 720P camera
Even so, that's better for customers. I fail to understand why AT&T won't allow their customers use the data they paid for however they want, although I think it has something to do with AT&T wanting to charge money for data while not wanting customers to actually use that data.
I Love AT&T as much as i love the iPhone 5
because theres no way anyone could love AT&T!
"AT&T said something similar, confirming today that FaceTime over Cellular would work on all supported devices, so long as the customer has a new Mobile Share data plan. "
No, AT&T did NOT say something similar. AT&T set restrictions on FaceTime use. No other carrier did. Big difference.
No, AT&T did NOT say something similar. AT&T set restrictions on FaceTime use. No other carrier did. Big difference.
I don't express hate for AT&T but I will be moving on to Verizon to get the iPhone 5. Verizon has more LTE coverage. Simple as that.
Maybe all the employees can raise $199 for the employer to buy a decent wireless router?
You realize that many (most?) companies regularly and actively block non-corporate content like video chat, youtube, pandora, etc. on their networks?
I will be taking AT&T to small claims court. I have never done anything like this before but with all this nickel and dime BS they keep doing to me (us), the customer, I'm tired of it.
I pay for 5 gb + hotspot. Hotspot and FaceTime use DATA. Data I am ALREADY PAYING FOR and it's a feature of the PHONE. It's not provided by AT&T at all. It's LOCKED OUT by them. For no other reason than to charge the customer double, triple for the same damn thing.
This is not an idle threat or comment. I urge anyone else that has the spare time to do the same. I should NOT have to switch data plans yet again to get a feature unlocked on my phone. Whether I use said feature is not the point.
Data is DATA AT&T.
I pay for 5 gb + hotspot. Hotspot and FaceTime use DATA. Data I am ALREADY PAYING FOR and it's a feature of the PHONE. It's not provided by AT&T at all. It's LOCKED OUT by them. For no other reason than to charge the customer double, triple for the same damn thing.
This is not an idle threat or comment. I urge anyone else that has the spare time to do the same. I should NOT have to switch data plans yet again to get a feature unlocked on my phone. Whether I use said feature is not the point.
Data is DATA AT&T.
Also, grandparents. Got my grandparents in India an iPad, now we video chat like it's the 21 century.
Yup, I have an 8 month old with grandparents an hour away and the other grandparents half a country away. Facetime is priceless for us. Well, maybe not priceless. I'm not switching to a Mobile Share plan to get access to cellular! I'll stick to wifi for now.
Now for that mobile hotspot....
Here's where things get interesting. Verizon pretty much has to allow FaceTime over Cellular because they are licensed in the C-block of the 700 MHz spectrum which has open network requirements. All of AT&T's licenses are outside of the C-block. For now.
The FCC released a public notice a few days ago that AT&T was attempting to transfer licenses from a company named CenturyTel. 4 of theses licenses are in the C-block. If AT&T were to acquire these licenses, they would be required to abide by the open network rules (at least in those areas of the spectrum.) I find it difficult to believe that AT&T would spend the effort to selective permit/deny that application depending on which frequency your phone was on.
I filed a Petititon to Deny with the FCC basically saying that I request that they deny the transfer of license unless AT&T agrees it will abide by these rules. It's important, in a pleading to deny, that you directly tie your argument to the proceeding. For example, you can't argue that AT&T sucks so you should deny it. You must argue that the transfer of the licenses to AT&T will have a direct negative consequence (such as the C-block regulations being violated) and should not be permitted unless conditions are agreed to.
If you want to and you don't have an FRN (if you have a ham radio license, you have an FRN too), then you can mail your opposition. I'm not sure whether or not you have to have a license of some sort to apply for an FRN.
If you do have an FRN, you can (publicly or confidentially) file it via ULS and then you also need to email it to 5 email addresses listed in the public notice. I submitted mine as confidential because I had my name/address/phone number in it.
The public notice can be found here:
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/db0911/DA-12-1479A1.pdf
The FCC released a public notice a few days ago that AT&T was attempting to transfer licenses from a company named CenturyTel. 4 of theses licenses are in the C-block. If AT&T were to acquire these licenses, they would be required to abide by the open network rules (at least in those areas of the spectrum.) I find it difficult to believe that AT&T would spend the effort to selective permit/deny that application depending on which frequency your phone was on.
I filed a Petititon to Deny with the FCC basically saying that I request that they deny the transfer of license unless AT&T agrees it will abide by these rules. It's important, in a pleading to deny, that you directly tie your argument to the proceeding. For example, you can't argue that AT&T sucks so you should deny it. You must argue that the transfer of the licenses to AT&T will have a direct negative consequence (such as the C-block regulations being violated) and should not be permitted unless conditions are agreed to.
If you want to and you don't have an FRN (if you have a ham radio license, you have an FRN too), then you can mail your opposition. I'm not sure whether or not you have to have a license of some sort to apply for an FRN.
If you do have an FRN, you can (publicly or confidentially) file it via ULS and then you also need to email it to 5 email addresses listed in the public notice. I submitted mine as confidential because I had my name/address/phone number in it.
The public notice can be found here:
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/db0911/DA-12-1479A1.pdf
Exactly. I feel similar using RedZone through VZW. They advertise these features but as we all know, many have to give up their unlimited data just to get a new phone so ...
It is not the phone that has resulted in this change, it is the carrier. The phone always could do this.
Lol
I've literally only used it the 1st week I got my new iPhone 4. Since then I've used it maybe once if that
That's crap. I have the iPad 2 which should support Facetime over cellular. Thank goodness for Skype.
