Tiered Data Plans Coming To the iPhone?

jfruhlinger writes "For years analysts have been insisting that Apple must introduce a cheaper iPhone, and soon. So, when Business Week heard that cheaper plans were coming, it reported the news in a positively giddy tone. But, I'm convinced that this is an under-the-radar move to shift to tiered data plans. Everyone who loves their all-you-can-eat iPhone data: enjoy it while it lasts."

Comments

economics

[RMH101]

Crap. It's just simple economics: if you want to lower the monthly charge for a phone on contract, you up the charges for calls and data. In the UK, if you want an iPhone on contract, you're looking at 30UKP a month plus the subsidised cost of the handset: this is a not-inconsiderable monthly charge. They'd sell to a whole additional demographic if they could push it out at 15UKP a month with a nearly-all-you-can-eat plan, with costs for going over your allowance - hell, I'd probably buy it myself - my 600 minutes and 600 texts a month gets barely touched, although I use the data a lot.
It would also give O2 a way of offloading all the surplus 3G iPhones cheap in advance of the latest model getting announced in June...

Re:economics

[timeOday]

...an iPhone on contract, you're looking at 30UKP a month plus the subsidised cost of the handset: this is a not-inconsiderable monthly charge. They'd sell to a whole additional demographic if they could push it out at 15UKP a month with a nearly-all-you-can-eat plan, with costs for going over your allowance... my 600 minutes and 600 texts a month gets barely touched

You're a perfect example of why they don't do it, and why unlimited plans in general survive. You said it yourself, you'd spend half as much on a metered plan. You think that's what they want, for revenue from you to decrease by 50%? That's pure profit; at half the price they'd need 3 or 4 customers to make the same profit because most of the first 15/mo would is "wasted" on, you know, providing service.

Re:economics

[bennomatic]

I'm not sure I understand this argument against the iPhone, as it's not specific to that product. If you get Sprint's "everything" plan, it's $99/mo, which is just shy of $1200/year or $2400 for two years. This is without taxes, and without the phone.

The cheapest plan I've seen with unlimited data is Boost's $50/mo plan, but I don't think you can get a smartphone through Boost, so you're using a less advanced phone with a smaller screen and a telephone keypad for browsing the web, sending emails &c. And that's still $600/year, or $1200/2 years plus taxes, plus phone.

Is there any smartphone/unlimited data phone/plan combination that's significantly less than the iPhone's plans? If the main difference is an extra couple of hundred dollars for the initial iPhone purchase, *that's* what you should be railing against, not the overall cost, which is really really similar between smartphone plans, IMLE.

The psychology will be interesting...

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

In observing iPhone users of my acquaintance, and in my vicinity, I've gotten the impression that one of the things that separates it from the touch, in their perception and use, is the "always connected" aspect of it. The being able to use the internet and internet related applications more or less without thinking about it, unlike the touch, where you have to be near a friendly AP.

Given that, I'd be very curious to see how it would fare under a limited data plan. Having to think about the data you are using really crimps the casual and spontaneous nature of the use(just as, when I was on dialup, "being online" was a separate state from "being on the computer" even though the dial-in process only took a couple of minutes, tops. Once I got broadband, even crap DSL, the two became more or less synonymous). If there is a large population that just wants an iPhone for music and/or status, then this should be well recieved. It should also be popular, assuming the price is low enough, with anybody who currently has a touch and a carrier throwaway handset and wants to consolidate.

Outside of those populations, though, an iPhone on a limited data plan seems rather unattractive. Strictly as a phone, the iPhone is merely OK, and pretty damn expensive for what you get. The charm is in what it can do with a data connection. Having to look over your shoulder at your usage all the time would seem to render that less attractive.

Re:The psychology will be interesting...

[horatio]

Here's my issue with the idea that AT&T is complaining the iPhone is using too much data, so they have to scrap the unlimited data plan. Said "unlimited" data plan is already limited - just not in a strictly by-the-numbers bandwidth fashion. There are several things I know of that I'm not permitted to do while on the 3G network:

• Apps > 10MB have to be done on the desktop version of iTunes, or over wifi.
• The (new) slingplayer app only works on wifi (would have been useful to know BEFORE paying $30 for the app. Do the WinCE/crackberry versions have this restriction?)
• Podcasts are limited to to those which the iPhone allows. You can subscribe in iTunes and sync, but you can't download podcasts > 10MB on 3G.
• I'm sure the lack of flash is about Apple exerting control over the platform, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was also about bandwidth.

I'm not suggesting that the iPhone should be a platform for fetching the latest Ubuntu ISO on the 3G network. But for AT&T to play like iPhone users have unlimited options to use as much bw as they like is just not reality.

Re:Bait and switch?

[Richard_at_work]

As long as they make this plan change after your initial term is up, it isn't a bait and switch - no one is forced to provide the same service indefinitely, especially when the original contract has expired.