Slashdot Mirror

You might think forced free tethering is awesome.

Here's the actual effect it has had - everyone gets to pay more for data since everyone has to be able to tether. The new mandatory shared data plans are more expensive than older piecemeal plans. WHat about people that didn't want to pay for tethering? Too bad.

Of course, that must be the answer, because no other media company on the planet has ever offered a data plan service that lets you download up to 250G in a month with line rates of around 30Mbps and the ability to use that at well over 10,000 different locations for a total of about $65 a month... http://www.att.com/shop/internet.html?tab=2 As the networks develop, the costs for the bandwidth and the "forced free tethering" become insignificant. And honestly, tethering doesn't cost anything. I can use Netflix on my trusty built in Android App and use FAR more bandwidth than that tethering app. Just sayin'.

I did a quick search on the AT&T site and came across this.

http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/att/3g-sim-white.html#fbid=cJveSn40ZqE

You can buy the SIM, enter the IMEI of your phone and then choose what plan you want. Seems like you'd be able to do this in stores, too, but I have no idea.

There's also this support page (http://www.att.com/esupport/article.jsp?sid=KB113269&cv=820&_requestid=334233#fbid=Vd1k_ywKiST) for getting a SIM card for a phone you already own.

Ahh, forgot to list my source. I'd provide a link directly to the page, but AT&T has ensured it's impossible to do so. Start here, click "Shop", click "Wireless", then check "Android" and "Apple®" under the "Filter by Operating System" heading.

here you go. from at&t's website. all modern, GSM phones available for purchase right now. all sub-3.2" screens.

http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/pantech/crossover-p8000-grey.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf
http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/sharp/fx-plus-black.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf
http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/lg/phoenix-silver-refurb.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf
http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/samsung/doubletime-white-with-pink-accents.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf

there are probably more their on their site, and this is just one carrier. i also poked around on t-mobile and verizon and found many options. but hey, i'm not your personal shopper, i'm just here to point out how silly you are.

here you go. from at&t's website. all modern, GSM phones available for purchase right now. all sub-3.2" screens.

http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/pantech/crossover-p8000-grey.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf
http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/sharp/fx-plus-black.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf
http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/lg/phoenix-silver-refurb.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf
http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/samsung/doubletime-white-with-pink-accents.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf

there are probably more their on their site, and this is just one carrier. i also poked around on t-mobile and verizon and found many options. but hey, i'm not your personal shopper, i'm just here to point out how silly you are.

here you go. from at&t's website. all modern, GSM phones available for purchase right now. all sub-3.2" screens.

http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/pantech/crossover-p8000-grey.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf
http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/sharp/fx-plus-black.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf
http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/lg/phoenix-silver-refurb.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf
http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/samsung/doubletime-white-with-pink-accents.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf

there are probably more their on their site, and this is just one carrier. i also poked around on t-mobile and verizon and found many options. but hey, i'm not your personal shopper, i'm just here to point out how silly you are.

here you go. from at&t's website. all modern, GSM phones available for purchase right now. all sub-3.2" screens.

http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/pantech/crossover-p8000-grey.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf
http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/sharp/fx-plus-black.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf
http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/lg/phoenix-silver-refurb.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf
http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/samsung/doubletime-white-with-pink-accents.html#fbid=LgoXmk5H4Gf

there are probably more their on their site, and this is just one carrier. i also poked around on t-mobile and verizon and found many options. but hey, i'm not your personal shopper, i'm just here to point out how silly you are.

Well you'll be shocked to learn that I actually agree with you.

You have a funny definition of "agree", as you then proceed to go out of your way to make excuses for them and put them on a pedestal.

but the point requires an adult mind to bring adult judgement to a real world situation

It requires a critical mind instead of a fanboy mind, which you obviously lack.

http://www.manufacturing.net/blogs/2012/07/google-made-in-the-usa

I hope it works out and leads to more, but it's a token effort and could just as easily be passed off as a PR stunt.

http://www.google.org/

http://www.corp.att.com/edu/

http://www.google.com/landing/givesback/2011/

Wal-Mart tops list of charitable cash contributors, AT&T No. 2

Comcast and Verizon and ATT have REPEATEDLY shown themselves to be rapacious ,exploitative and dishonest.

And it when it comes to things like privacy, I gave you plenty of examples where Google was acting in a self-serving manner, which you ignored.

If Google wants to protect NN by laying down fiber and bypassing that group of assholes then I say bully for them and more power to them.

I do too, but ultimately it's in Google's self-interest to do so, and the whole point is that you can't blindly trust Google to not take advantage if they ever gain a dominant position. The other thing, going back to privacy, is that being the ISP means you see all traffic.

The AT&T Go Phones weren't around the last time I was looking at prepaid, at least in this area, some 4 or 5 years ago, as far as I recall (I may be wrong).

Taking a quick look at the plans, for smartphones, they require that you obtain a plan with a data package:

From http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/plans/prepaidplans.html#planlist-ptip_sku5240223 :

Smartphone users must purchase a data package to use data services on eligible plans. Pay-Per-Use data is not available with smartphones.

The $50/month plan is the only one that comes with a data package.

So 6 smartphones * $50/month, I end up paying the same $300/month that I would under the new Mobile Share plans, with the advantage that roaming internationally is a quick phone call to activate a feature, and my father doesn't have to deal with swapping a sim or dealing with having separate phone numbers.

I just broke mine down as well. I currently do a similar plan: $80 service, $30 for unlimited text, $10 for 2nd smartphone, $30 for 1st smartphone's data plan (unlimited), $25 for second's 2GB data = $175 subtotal, $196.50 with taxes.

I just combed through our phone minutes' usage, and this was surprisingly close, even went over in a month when we got engaged. Data we use is about 1.5 GB/mo between us. But, data is sold in lots of 250 MB (which each of us exceeds) and $25 or $30 for 2 GB or my grandfathered-in unlimited. There is a lot of waste in data purchase here. As for text messages, my fiancée is a texter, so unlimited is necessary.

Now, on the new plan, it's $40 service (not $80, $90 with second phone), but up to $130 for two phones. But no texting plan charge. So it's really $130 vs $120. Now let's look at data. Currently, I pay $55 for a lot of data that I don't use. For the same I could get probably 5 GB for $60, which is excessive for our use case. 3GB is fine even if I get tablets in on it, so let's say $30 for data, making it $160 (new) vs. $175 (current). So, maybe the new plan is a bit cheaper, maybe more expensive, depending. I think so far it's fair for a shared plan.

Now let's put tablets into play. On my current plan, it's be somewhere like $35, but let's say $30 based on this. I have an iPad. I have an iPhone. iOS devices really only shine with internet access. My iPad is only Wi-Fi because I don't want to shell out $30 more per month due to data that I never use the entirety of plus whatever device connection charge there will be. But I don't use it as much because I can't whip it out and go to Google without searching for WiFi, or worse, asking my friends for their WiFi passwords. With the new plan, it would be $10 per tablet. It'll be a lot more tempting to get an Android tablet, Win 8 or the next iPad OMG NEW pwnie if I can take $10 and pool it with the same data. In the end, I can tack on $10 for a new device to get $170 vs. $205. Say I want one for me and one for her (I *might* need another GB now); $195 vs $235. Without the 4th GB of data, it would would be $180 vs $235. Wow.

I'd post a tabular comparison if /. allowed tables.

There are cordless phones with multiple handsets that will use your cellphone for the outgoing line.

Yes unlike this chart, it is very hard to figure out the cost of your plan .. I know charts can be very confusing

http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/store/controller?item=prepayItem&action=viewPrepayOverview

Or this one from ATT

http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-service/cell-phone-plans/pyg-cell-phone-plans.jsp?wtSlotClick=1-007FTV-0-2&_requestid=186952

Or this one from Team Mobile
http://prepaid-phones.t-mobile.com/pay-as-you-go-plans

You do not have to pay .20 per txt and it is very easy to figure out the plan that works best for you (well I guess since many in the USA by the time they get to HS can not balance a checkbook so basic addition and subtraction is elusive it really is not so easy) ... I can not find an actual study that has the number of people that take the very basic most expensive prepay option as you claim (ie 20c per txt or 25c/min) since an average phone call takes more then 3 min based at least on this article not just because I felt it was true (ie $1 on the perpay)
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_average_length_of_a_phone_call

With prepay you have to use up the funds you put on your phone it almost doesn't make sense to do the 100% pay as you go option unless you know that on any given day you will never make a call more then 3 min long and the phone is really just for emergencies (not 911 emergencies) and even then if you get the 100/year plan (that is less then 10/month for the not so math inclined) and the $2/day option the most you will pay on any given day you use the phone is $2 the least is 0 and each txt is .02 so you are better off sending a txt message then making a call if you can. Yes you do need some basic math and to pay attention to what you do.

F you dude. Why does the entire world send th students to our universities.? Because they are the best in the world. Why os ot tat America consistantly produces more Noble prize winners then the entire world combined. F- you dude.

Yes unlike this chart, it is very hard to figure out the cost of your plan .. I know charts can be very confusing http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/store/controller?item=prepayItem&action=viewPrepayOverview Or this one from ATT http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-service/cell-phone-plans/pyg-cell-phone-plans.jsp?wtSlotClick=1-007FTV-0-2&_requestid=186952 Or this one from Team Mobile http://prepaid-phones.t-mobile.com/pay-as-you-go-plans You do not have to pay .20 per txt and it is very easy to figure out the plan that works best for you (well I guess since many in the USA by the time they get to HS can not balance a checkbook so basic addition and subtraction is elusive it really is not so easy) ... I can not find an actual study that has the number of people that take the very basic most expensive prepay option as you claim (ie 20c per txt or 25c/min) since an average phone call takes more then 3 min based at least on this article not just because I felt it was true (ie $1 on the perpay) http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_average_length_of_a_phone_call With prepay you have to use up the funds you put on your phone it almost doesn't make sense to do the 100% pay as you go option unless you know that on any given day you will never make a call more then 3 min long and the phone is really just for emergencies (not 911 emergencies) and even then if you get the 100/year plan (that is less then 10/month for the not so math inclined) and the $2/day option the most you will pay on any given day you use the phone is $2 the least is 0 and each txt is .02 so you are better off sending a txt message then making a call if you can. Yes you do need some basic math and to pay attention to what you do.

https://www.att.com/esupport/main.jsp?cv=820&gnLinkId=s3001
I want to say I also used their chat to unlock one of them (i've done this more than once - non iphone though).

Number:
1-800-331-0500 (don't call from the phone you're trying to unlock, btw)

Since they don't CLEARLY disclose that it's "unlimited data" in their advertising, it's misleading at best.

It's clear enough on their website, and they don't even seem to be offering the "unlimited" plans anymore (except for non-smartphones).

http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/plans/data-plans.jsp

http://www.att.com/esupport/datausage.jsp

But in any case, at best, you should be able to cancel your contract prematurely, after paying for the balance of your phone. You shouldn't be able to get arbitrary amounts of data for free in perpetuity, which is what you seem to want.

Since they don't CLEARLY disclose that it's "unlimited data" in their advertising, it's misleading at best.

It's clear enough on their website, and they don't even seem to be offering the "unlimited" plans anymore (except for non-smartphones).

http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/plans/data-plans.jsp

http://www.att.com/esupport/datausage.jsp

But in any case, at best, you should be able to cancel your contract prematurely, after paying for the balance of your phone. You shouldn't be able to get arbitrary amounts of data for free in perpetuity, which is what you seem to want.

All of the major carriers have coverage maps that are more or less accurate.

Verizon: www.verizonwireless.com/wireless-coverage-area-map.shtml

AT&T: http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/#?type=data

Sprint: http://coverage.sprint.com/IMPACT.jsp?

T-Mobile: http://www.t-mobile.com/coverage/pcc.aspx

Other Sites that may be useful:
http://www.cellreception.com/coverage/
http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phone-coverage-map/

Behold, the power of Google.

Obviously the iPhone is not the most expensive phone on the market, but if you look at (for instance) subsidized phones from AT&T, the most expensive phone they have is an iPhone 4S 64GB for $399 (with contract, of course). The second most expensive phone they have is a tie between the Samsung Galaxy Note and the iPhone 4S 32GB ($299). The cheapest, 16GB iPhone 4S is $199, which is the highest price of any other phone they offer (a few Androids and a Windows Phone). They do offer the two and a half year old iPhone 3GS for $0.99 (which honestly is good enough for a lot of people), but other than that, it is entirely fair to say that iPhones are very expensive, considering recent models are the first, second (tied), and third (tied) most expensive phones from the most expensive carrier in the US.

Or simply get a tablet that is waterproof (and presumably spaghetti sauce proof too) - Pantech Element

AT&T is actually fairly reasonable when it comes to peering. You can see their terms here. I would be shocked if AT&T spent anything network access in the US.

With AT&T you can block all texts that come from the internet.

Many other carriers have a similar option. It doesn't cost anything.

It's funny that you say that, because based on (admittedly half year old) data that an app developer collected about reconnect rates, Japan was by an order of magnitude the worst country with regards to number of reconnects that this app had to perform (DoCoMo was the second-to-worst carrier around the world).

Reconnects happen because the cell carrier closes a connection or times out--a good cell carrier won't change your IP address or RST your connections when you switch towers, but a bad one might decide to assign a new IP address each time. On some apps, reconnection may consume up to 1MB of bandwidth each time as they attempts to resync data (Yes, good apps shouldn't do this, but I have seen it happen.)

The problem is not Android -- the problem is the shitty QoS that most mobile carriers put on their networks, combined with the fact that they often kill connections at the NAT layer without notification, time out connections over unwanted ports and block protocols that they don't like.

The end result is that everything on a cell network has to happen over port 80 or port 443, with the SSL negotiation overhead that involves, combined with sending keepalives every 4 minutes. Yes, Android is unoptimized. DoCoMo might be doing everything right, but they bear the price of all of the terrible cell carriers that go out of their way to block data (AT&T, T-Mobile, I'm looking at you). Android 4.0 has a Data usage monitor that helps a ton in debugging misbehaving apps, but data is a fact of life.

That said, Apple may have made a good decision by forcing app developers to use push notifications when the app is in the background. Android messed up push notifications by tying them to Google Talk and Android Market -- this means apps that require push will not run on a large fraction of android devices around the world (including the Kindle Fire). The result is that apps don't use push and implement their own (often buggy/wasteful) push system.

Finally, if DoCoMo doesn't want users to send/receive data, then limit their bandwidth for crying out loud. Don't whine when you provide fast service and people use it. What is complaining to the OS manufacturer going to do? They provide a platform, not the apps or the service they run on.

Apple shipped 15.4 million iPads worldwide in the 4th quarter. 200k xoom tablets is nothing.

AT&T had 7.6 million iPhone activations in the 4th quarter. That's only one carrier in one country. 5 million Android phones world-wide is nothing in comparison.

We may change any terms, conditions, rates, fees, expenses, or charges regarding your Services at any time. We will provide you with notice of material changes (other than changes to governmental fees, proportional charges for governmental mandates, roaming rates or administrative charges) either in your monthly bill or separately. You understand and agree that State and Federal Universal Service Fees and other governmentally imposed fees, whether or not assessed directly upon you, may be increased based upon the government's or our calculations.

IF WE INCREASE THE PRICE OF ANY OF THE SERVICES TO WHICH YOU SUBSCRIBE, BEYOND THE LIMITS SET FORTH IN YOUR CUSTOMER SERVICE SUMMARY, OR IF WE MATERIALLY DECREASE THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA IN WHICH YOUR AIRTIME RATE APPLIES (OTHER THAN A TEMPORARY DECREASE FOR REPAIRS OR MAINTENANCE), WE'LL DISCLOSE THE CHANGE AT LEAST ONE BILLING CYCLE IN ADVANCE (EITHER THROUGH A NOTICE WITH YOUR BILL, A TEXT MESSAGE TO YOUR DEVICE, OR OTHERWISE), AND YOU MAY TERMINATE THIS AGREEMENT WITHOUT PAYING AN EARLY TERMINATION FEE OR RETURNING OR PAYING FOR ANY PROMOTIONAL ITEMS, PROVIDED YOUR NOTICE OF TERMINATION IS DELIVERED TO US WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER THE FIRST BILL REFLECTING THE CHANGE.

From the AT&T Wireless Terms and Conditions, Section 1.3.

It's all about maximizing profits, shareholder value, and executive bonuses ...They can spend some of those profits to buy lawmakers to ensure they get more profits.

If you want to understand why it costs more in the US, the answer is "because they can".

Also things like this: http://www.att.com/gen/corporate-citizenship?pid=7737

While I realize it doesn't fit well with your anti-corporate rant, nearly all large American companies give back tremendously to local, regional, and national charities. Many small and medium sized ones do as well. Hell, even the evil oil companies do it. (I don't have a reference handy, but I believe in 2010 the national total of corporate donations was well over 300bn. )

Nobody likes to talk about that for some reason - I suspect because it causes some cognitive dissonance when you go in knowing that corporations are defined by profits and executive bonuses.

If you're able to estimate that you'd use 2.81GB a month doing this, why would you ever elect to have a 300MB plan. You can get 30GB for $30.00 a month, which would keep your annual cost around $360.00 a year excluding taxes and other fees - same as the unlimited plan.

Actually, I think the point is they won't give you a $30 unlimited plan any more.

Judging by the link in TFS ... you can get 3GB (not 30GB) for $30/month .. and you can get $5GB for $50 (I'm going on smart phones here). And, it says you'll be automatically charged for any overages.

So it sounds like people who had the old $30/month for unlimited can get way more for less money than someone newly signing up now. So those people are paying the same monthly fee for unlimited which any new customer is going to pay for 300MB ... so 1/10th the data for the exact same price. If I was paying 10x the price for something as the guy across the street, I'd be feeling ripped off.

This is more about the perception (or fact) that the company is jacking up the price for the same service over time ... quite possibly just to make more money without needing to invest in more infrastructure.

This, unfortunately, is how these things have been trending ... the cable/cell phone companies have been flogging their "newer bigger faster" networks, but in the process they also seem to be becoming more restrictive and expensive.

When AT&T asserts their new plans offer "great value" for their customers, it seems that the truth of that is that these new plans offer great profits. In fact, the entire 4th link in the summary is someone arguing that AT&T's new prices is essentially price gouging.

Instead of the cost of data going down over time, it's going up ... largely because now they're trying to sell the same data to a lot more people, and also because they haven't expanded their capacity to keep up with their marketing of it.

Was there not a time when Slashdot used to recognize and auto-link URL's? Gahhhh! Annoying. Anyway, here's the links;

Motorola Atrix
Motorola Atrix Lapdockx
Webtop2SD
Ubuntu on Webtop
Atrix Multimedia Dock
BMW Performance Center Delivery

As an aside; Moto is just about to release the Atrix 2 which does apparently make it faster with more memory, thus fixing the couple of issues I do have with the Atrix. However, I don't know how long it'll be before all these hacks are available... I figure not long given XDA-Developers turnaround time on this stuff :)

If we're nitpicking, C is not strictly a subset of C++, but it's close enough. Anyway, your argument is flawed. If a feature is unnecessary and makes programs harder to write, debug, and maintain, a language that omits it can be superior to one that includes it. Let's imagine, for instance, a "comefrom" construct that you can insert in arbitrary locations in your code. Would a language that supported "comefrom" be superior to one that doesn't?

I just confirmed that AT&T also offers service with no contract, though you have to go to a store to do it (they don't do it online). They call it "No Commitment Pricing" and is referenced in their FAQ at http://www.att.com/shop/wireless/shopping-faqs.jsp#01

Q. What is no-commitment pricing?
A. When you want a new AT&T phone, but don’t want to commit to a long-term contract, no-commitment pricing is an option. Also referred to as "retail price," this option does not require a two-year contract or other long-term service commitment. It’s simply the non-discounted equipment price, and is available to customers that are not on a prepaid or GoPhone® plan.

You can buy a phone at no-commitment prices by choosing one of the two options below:

        Existing customers can buy online by logging in to your account to upgrade.
        New customers cannot buy phones at no-commitment pricing online at this time. Please visit an AT&T retail store to purchase. Visit our store locator for a store near you.

I admit that the information on the AT&T site is overwhelming and i do not get heads or tails from it.
But it looks like you could buy a phone upfront (e.g. iphone $649 ) and pay 50$ monthly (unlimited calls, texts and data):
http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-service/cell-phone-plans/pyg-cell-phone-plans.jsp?_requestid=12274
Or for example an iphone plan - $199.99+$36.00, 2 year contract (unlimited voice and messaging, DataPro 4GB for iPhone 4S) at $134.99 monthly

Now for the math part over 2 years:
Phone bought and an "unsubsidized" plan: 649+24*50=1849
Phone "subsidized" by AT&T (actually by you): 199.99+36+24*134.99=3475.75

I might have got the information wrong though.

In my home country I buy an unlocked phone upfront (iphone for 600€ - yes, they are quite a bit more expensive here). I have an unlimited data plan and i pay for the minutes and sms's without any plans. My total monthly bill is generally around 20€ ($27) unless i've been abroad. I could have an iphone package from the operator with which i would pay 99€ for an iphone upfront but then i would pay around 60€ or more monthly for two years. I did the math and decided otherwise. And i can switch providers at any second (and they know it). And i can buy a prepaid data sim when i am abroad and use it because my phone isn't locked.

'No advertising, no support, no bug fixes, payment in advance.'

No advertising?

And they're not really selling "Android" the operating system - Google does that; they sell/offer it to their customers, who are, in this case, phone (and tablet) manufacturers. AT&T are selling phones that run Android (just as they sell phones that run iOS and Windows Phone).

I don't know whether AT&T or the phone manufacturer would be the ones responsible for providing support and/or bug fixes in this case.

'No advertising, no support, no bug fixes, payment in advance.'

No advertising?

And they're not really selling "Android" the operating system - Google does that; they sell/offer it to their customers, who are, in this case, phone (and tablet) manufacturers. AT&T are selling phones that run Android (just as they sell phones that run iOS and Windows Phone).

I don't know whether AT&T or the phone manufacturer would be the ones responsible for providing support and/or bug fixes in this case.

Apple's MobileMe has been down more this year that RIM has in the last 10.

Asking because I genuinely don't know: how much of that MobileMe downtime has affected customer's messaging? Were the outages in, say, MobileMe's photo gallery website or in their mail system?

in 2008 Apple's MobileMe service was out for 18 days -- and that's a $99/year service!

Forgive me for quoting AT&T, but they were the only carrier who published a rate chart that I could find without digging around longer than I'm willing to. It looks like their cheapest "BlackBerry Personal" data plan is $360/year. That plan pays for more than just BlackBerry messaging, just as MobileMe includes more than just email, so I'm not sure how'd you'd calculate the relative marginal costs of those features.

iCloud and Siri have also already experienced outages

...neither of which caused messaging slowdown or delays. You keep comparing apples to oranges without comparing Apples to BlackBerries. How much have those respective companies' messaging systems - just messaging and not web hosting or cloud music storage! - been down in the last 5 years? How much do their customers pay them for just messaging - not web hosting or cloud music storage! - each year? Without that data, comparisons are meaningless.

I have an AT&T provided Samsung Galaxy and don't see it on that phone. AT&T Support also provided the following:

Please note: Protecting your personal information is one of our highest priorities; hence, you will be required to provide account related information to ensure whom we are working with. Data encryption is also enabled to protect your personal information during this chat session. For more information please go to http://www.wireless.att.com/privacy/ or http://www.att.com/privacy/. Please wait for a site operator to respond.

You are now connected with 'Allison'.

Allison: Thank you for contacting Business Data Support. My name is Allison. Before we begin, can I confirm the wireless number that we will be working with is XXX-XXX-XXXX?

Me: Correct

Allison: I understand you want to know if your phone has CarrierIQ on it, is that correct

Me: Correct

Allison: I'll be more than happy to assist you, one moment please.

Allison: That does not come installed on any of our devices.

Me: Thank you.

Allison: If you need additional assistance specific to your device, you can view our website at http://www.att.com/biztech. We welcome your feedback; please take a moment to complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey. Thank you for your business and have a pleasant day.

Chat session has been terminated by the specialist.

I have an AT&T provided Samsung Galaxy and don't see it on that phone. AT&T Support also provided the following:

Please note: Protecting your personal information is one of our highest priorities; hence, you will be required to provide account related information to ensure whom we are working with. Data encryption is also enabled to protect your personal information during this chat session. For more information please go to http://www.wireless.att.com/privacy/ or http://www.att.com/privacy/. Please wait for a site operator to respond.

You are now connected with 'Allison'.

Allison: Thank you for contacting Business Data Support. My name is Allison. Before we begin, can I confirm the wireless number that we will be working with is XXX-XXX-XXXX?

Me: Correct

Allison: I understand you want to know if your phone has CarrierIQ on it, is that correct

Me: Correct

Allison: I'll be more than happy to assist you, one moment please.

Allison: That does not come installed on any of our devices.

Me: Thank you.

Allison: If you need additional assistance specific to your device, you can view our website at http://www.att.com/biztech. We welcome your feedback; please take a moment to complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey. Thank you for your business and have a pleasant day.

Chat session has been terminated by the specialist.

I have an AT&T provided Samsung Galaxy and don't see it on that phone. AT&T Support also provided the following:

Please note: Protecting your personal information is one of our highest priorities; hence, you will be required to provide account related information to ensure whom we are working with. Data encryption is also enabled to protect your personal information during this chat session. For more information please go to http://www.wireless.att.com/privacy/ or http://www.att.com/privacy/. Please wait for a site operator to respond.

You are now connected with 'Allison'.

Allison: Thank you for contacting Business Data Support. My name is Allison. Before we begin, can I confirm the wireless number that we will be working with is XXX-XXX-XXXX?

Me: Correct

Allison: I understand you want to know if your phone has CarrierIQ on it, is that correct

Me: Correct

Allison: I'll be more than happy to assist you, one moment please.

Allison: That does not come installed on any of our devices.

Me: Thank you.

Allison: If you need additional assistance specific to your device, you can view our website at http://www.att.com/biztech. We welcome your feedback; please take a moment to complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey. Thank you for your business and have a pleasant day.

Chat session has been terminated by the specialist.

Read the F*ing Find Print people! Your wireless carrier can do whatever they want with devices provisioned on their network. You therefore cannot be "surprised" when a third party comes along and offers them "services" to track customer usage patterns.

From AT&T Wireless Terms and Conditions

You acknowledge that every business or personal decision, to some degree or another, represents an assumption of risk, and that neither AT&T nor its content and service providers or suppliers, in providing information, applications or other content or services, or access to information, applications, or other content underwrites, can underwrite, or assumes your risk in any manner whatsoever.

.... and ....

From 3.1 "My Device"

You are responsible for all phones and other devices containing a SIM assigned to your account ("Devices"). Your Device must be compatible with, and not interfere with, our Services and must comply with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations. We may periodically program your Device remotely with system settings for roaming service, to direct your Device to use network services most appropriate for your typical usage, and other features that cannot be changed manually.

Devices purchased for use on AT&T's system are designed for use exclusively on AT&T's system ("Equipment"). You agree that you won't make any modifications to the Equipment or programming to enable the Equipment to operate on any other system. AT&T may, at its sole and absolute discretion, modify the programming to enable the operation of the Equipment on other systems.

Is it like this?

Well, you can buy that now.

And this winter, we read that there is not only a Facebook phone coming (albeit no sign of this particular one yet), but there's more than one.

Hey, when do we get new news, huh?

In October of 1979 I had a preprocessor, called Cpre, that added Simulalike classes to C run- ning and in March of 1980 this preprocessor had been refined to the point where it supported one real project and several experiments.

...

Cfront was originally written in C with Classes (what else?) and soon transcribed into C84 so that the very first working C++ compiler was done in C++. Even the first version of Cfront used classes heavily, but no virtual functions because they were not available at the start of the project.

You're grandfathered in because you signed up for an unlimited plan before they got out of the unlimited-data business. You can't open a new account at Verizon with an unlimited data plan.

And I would venture to guess that they will eventually start squeezing those of you who are grandfathered in as well, too. They'll either force you to switch to a metered data plan in order to qualify for subsidies on a new device, or do the sort of thing that AT&T has already started doing:

Starting October 1, smartphone customers with unlimited data plans may experience reduced speeds once their usage in a billing cycle reaches the level that puts them among the top 5 percent of heaviest data users. These customers can still use unlimited data and their speeds will be restored with the start of the next billing cycle. Before you are affected, we will provide multiple notices, including a grace period.

As soon as someone releases an LTE chipset that doesn't kill battery life, and LTE becomes widely available, it'll be in the next iPhone. Right now, LTE would raise the cost of the phone, shorten the battery life, and only benefit a small percentage of the buyers.

LTE Deployment map, most of the world doesn't even have any LTE deployment. North America, parts of Europe, southeast Asia, Japan, Saudi Arabia, and Uzebekistan are the only current deployments, and most of those offer only spotty coverage.
AT&T is claiming "LTE planned for up to 15 cities by the end of 2011"
Verizon has wider LTE coverage, but it's nowhere near nationwide and won't be for several more years.
Sprint's LTE coverage is in a similar situation.

By the time that LTE is actually available to a sizable percentage of buyers, it'll be time to upgrade the phone anyway. And HSDPA+ @ 14.4Mbps is fast enough for most users in the meantime.

One thing Apple understands that most competitors (and critics) don't is that most users care about usability, not about specifications. Battery life is more important to most users than somewhat faster downloads (that are only available to a small percentage of users anyway). Only the small percentage of technically savvy users care about specs (and those users and critics are the same ones who would complain about the lack of 4G coverage if it did include LTE).

Making it even easier to shoot yourself in the foot.

I can has C++ canon, plz? kthxbai

I find the quizzical statement in the posting description a bit disingenuous - the fax machine, for all it's archaic attributes, is only slightly more complex than a touch-tone phone, a 1940's technology widely rolled out in the 1960's.

If you start with paper, FAX is easy - if you start with an electronic document, email is easy. The commenter obviously deals with electronic documents, not paper ones. Email is neither simpler nor cheaper.

To send an email attachment you need to scan the page, write an email, attach the scan to the email, send the email, hope the email isn't too large for the recipient, hope the recipient gets the email, and the recipient has to open the attachment and print the email.

To fax a paper document you simply drop it in a hopper, dial the phone number and hit the 'send' button - all the above is had led for you, with a paper document popping out the other end.

Of course, FAXing is also cheaper - unlimited domestic calling is common today, and cheaper than broadband Internet OR dial-up Internet access and a landline phone. You can typically FAX a document cheaper than you can send it via snail mail, and it has the added bonus of delivery confirmation AND near-instant delivery.

Given the new pointer types: unique_ptr, shared_ptr, and weak_ptr, I'd say that the spec actually disagrees with you. You practically never actually need to call delete if you use them.

It even provides the basis for implementing a garbage collector within C++ (ABI), although one is not required to meet the spec.

It's quite fair to compare and contrast C#, Java, and C++ as long as you realize they each offer benefits, with trade offs. Not to mention, Java nor C# are truly interpreted. They are both compiled locally to native code on the local machine, which can potentially lead to better optimizations than the else-where compiled C++ binaries. In practice, the C++ will still be faster, but lets not get ahead of ourselves.

Given the new pointer types: unique_ptr, shared_ptr, and weak_ptr, I'd say that the spec actually disagrees with you. You practically never actually need to call delete if you use them.

It even provides the basis for implementing a garbage collector within C++ (ABI), although one is not required to meet the spec.

It's quite fair to compare and contrast C#, Java, and C++ as long as you realize they each offer benefits, with trade offs. Not to mention, Java nor C# are truly interpreted. They are both compiled locally to native code on the local machine, which can potentially lead to better optimizations than the else-where compiled C++ binaries. In practice, the C++ will still be faster, but lets not get ahead of ourselves.

At least it's in no trouble of dying unlike C# which Microsoft seems to enjoy having confusion surround (see the HTML/JavaScript fiasco)

Seriously? People are still confused about that?

They showed off their new tile interface for Windows 8 and Microsoft did not say anything about .NET _or_ C++. Clearly, this means that .NET is being kicked to the curb.

Sure, their bet in the mobile space depends on .NET. Their browser extension, which recently just got a major revision depends on .NET. And they are rumored to be adding .NET to the Xbox by the way of Silverlight, and they already use it exclusively with XNA on the Xbox.

Top it off with the fact that Microsoft is moving to a new architecture and what makes sense? Keeping their MSIL-based binaries going. After all, the C++ binaries--without some sort of "universal" extension like Mac OS X had between PowerPC and x86--won't work. What will? .NET.

...or Java, which Oracle seems intent on bringing confusion, branding, and licensing to...

Realistically, I do not even think Java is really in a confused state. The only confusion is whether or not someone can roll their own JVM, and whether they will play ball with Apache on the committee level.

I am all for C++, and if anything, I am more shocked that C++ has been able to pick up features before Java. C++ beat Java to lambda expressions (coming in its own form in Java in December 2012--Java 8) and automatic type deduction (Java's approach realized in Java 7 late last month is to enable programmers to avoid typing in the generic arguments on the right hand side of the expression: List<String> list = new ArrayList<>();).

At least it's in no trouble of dying unlike C# which Microsoft seems to enjoy having confusion surround (see the HTML/JavaScript fiasco)

Seriously? People are still confused about that?

They showed off their new tile interface for Windows 8 and Microsoft did not say anything about .NET _or_ C++. Clearly, this means that .NET is being kicked to the curb.

Sure, their bet in the mobile space depends on .NET. Their browser extension, which recently just got a major revision depends on .NET. And they are rumored to be adding .NET to the Xbox by the way of Silverlight, and they already use it exclusively with XNA on the Xbox.

Top it off with the fact that Microsoft is moving to a new architecture and what makes sense? Keeping their MSIL-based binaries going. After all, the C++ binaries--without some sort of "universal" extension like Mac OS X had between PowerPC and x86--won't work. What will? .NET.

...or Java, which Oracle seems intent on bringing confusion, branding, and licensing to...

Realistically, I do not even think Java is really in a confused state. The only confusion is whether or not someone can roll their own JVM, and whether they will play ball with Apache on the committee level.

I am all for C++, and if anything, I am more shocked that C++ has been able to pick up features before Java. C++ beat Java to lambda expressions (coming in its own form in Java in December 2012--Java 8) and automatic type deduction (Java's approach realized in Java 7 late last month is to enable programmers to avoid typing in the generic arguments on the right hand side of the expression: List<String> list = new ArrayList<>();).

Or the fact that practically every major software project is developed using C++?

The page you linked to doesn't really back up that claim. It says right at the top that this page lists only software written in C++. Sure, there is a lot of software being developed in C++, but there is also a lot of software being developed in C (e.g. Linux, most of GNU, most projects on Freshmeat), Java (a lot of commercial development, and a growing number of open source projects, too), and don't forget PHP and JavaScript, which are widely used for programming for the Web (e.g. by Google and Facebook).

Of the applications I use on a daily basis, only my web browser (over time, this has been Opera, Mozilla, Konqueror and Firefox) is written in C++. Most of the rest is written in C, with a handful of things written in Perl and a handful in Ruby. Then again, I don't use Windows. It seems to me that C++ and C# are much bigger there than in the Unix world.

History says you can program the same performance and capability as C++ in .NET, Java, C#, Scala, Ada, and Haskell

What does history say about cross-platform support? Or the availability of a huge existing codebase? Or the fact that practically every major software project is developed using C++?

If you want to put your money on Scala, be my guest. There's always a cool-new-thing, and it's usually fun to play with. But where's your paycheck coming from? If it's Java or C#, then start updating your resume. Java's legal crap (and Oracle crap) is pushing companies away, and .Net is getting gently walked off the plank by MS itself. The only languages that keep making a comeback (when people need a solid ground to work on) are C and C++. So far there aren't any exceptions.

Are you serious? I typed "Pantech Breeze" into Google and got http://www.pantechusa.com/phones/breeze_ii as the second search result, behind AT&T's page for the phone.

Googling for "Pantech Breeze USB" returned this page which has a bunch of information about USB and the phone. Apparently you need to use Microsoft's ActiveSync package to connect the phone, or bluetooth.

You might want to check your computer for viruses and trojans. It sounds like something is intercepting your search results.