Slashdot Mirror
Will AT&T Charge Extra For MMS & Tethering?
snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Bill Snyder questions whether AT&T's jockeying on tethering and MMS may signal coming iPhone pricing surcharges. After all, as Apple's exclusive US partner, Ma Bell should have plenty of insight into upcoming iPhone features and revenue opportunities. Yet AT&T was very conspicuous in its absence from the list of providers who will support tethering and MMS at Tuesday's launch of the new iPhone at WWDC, and by Wednesday, it was backpedaling furiously, saying it will offer both services — later in the year. Certainly, the exclusive arrangement between the companies is proving to be an ugly roadblock to Apple's iPhone vision. But Snyder thinks it may go deeper than that: 'My best guess is that we'll see horrendous pricing surcharges for tethering and MMS, on top of the already expensive data and voice charges iPhone users pay. I don't think AT&T execs wanted to stand up at WWDC and announce that.'"
I have an iphone (original model), so the rate increase might affect me. The iPhone has been tremendously successful for AT&T. I can't remember the exact statistics, but something like over half of new subscribers have an iphone and they are getting 2-3x as many new subscribers as any other network. $3-5/month for MMS will not deter many people, so it will probably translate to increased profits. Iphone users are use significantly more bandwidth than other customers, so AT&T is probably going to offset some of the increased network costs. However, it's a common situation where costs for the provider go up a certain amount, x, but the costs increases by 1.5x, 2x or maybe even more. It certainly sucks for consumers, but there is certainly rationale to it. It reminds me of an intro Economics class I took. Consumer Surplus is the difference between how much the consumer values a good and how much the supplier is willing to sell it for. In this example, I would argue that most iphone customers are getting a consumer surplus, which means that AT&T could charge more and still have happy consumers (they still think the transaction is better than holding onto their money). Err, I'll qualify that statement; they will have consumers that are still happy but certainly not as happy. I don't pretend to defend AT&T or even like them, but this is a pretty straightforward business decision.
A small point, but the company that sells you cellular service under the name "AT&T Mobility" is actually a company that was known up until two years ago as "Cingular Wireless," which is basically the old SBC. I had actual AT&T wireless from the real AT&T in the 90s and here in LA, on CDMA, it was great and the customer service was perfectly fine. It all went downhill when SBC/Cingular bought them.
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
Uh, we also have Blackberries, and from our experience they are 10x buggier than the iPhones. The people with iPhones? Almost zero support requests. The people with Blackberries? Constant problems.
Facebook is the new AOL
In the USA; If I browse adult stuff at work on works PC and Internet connection, work can be held libel. If I browse adult stuff on the iPhone at work using my own Internet connect, it is less likely that work can be held libel.
But what if I provide my own wireless Internet connection and bypass the filters work has in place?
I speak as one who does the filtering, not one who is trying to bypass them.
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
My experience with both, and T-Mobile is that they do not offer reduced rates if you intend to use a phone you acquired from another source. Their rate plans are all designed with the intent that they should subsidize the purchase of a new phone for much less money based on the entering of a long duration contract. In effect, the telecoms are financing your cell phone-except that if you already have one, you dont get a reduced rate.
Really? Here's my recent experience:
I was recently looking to upgrade my phone. My last phone was from ATT with a two year contract, and I wanted something more updated and faster. When I signed the contract, I was able to get unlimited data added for $15/mo. (they no longer offer this plan) So I looked around for a while and debated between the subsidized Nokia E71x, or an unlocked Nokia model. Now the ATT subsidized Nokia was only $99 after rebate, with of course another two year contract. An unlocked Nokia E75 was $399 after $50 rebate.
However, the subsidized E71x required their PDA/Smartphone data package which is $30/mo - that seemed pretty ridiculous because I was currently getting unlimited data at $15/mo. After talking with an ATT rep, I found that if I bought an unlocked phone I could either grandfather in my old plan and leave it be with the data at $15/mo, or I could upgrade my plan to a current package and tack on unlimited data for only $10/mo! The reason is that ATT cannot force an unsubsidized phone to use their "special" data plans tailored for their subsidized models (please - $30/mo just because the phone has a QWERTY?)
You can do the math. Needless to say, although I've spent more money upfront on a phone, I can recover the cost before two years. If the phone lasts/stays with me longer than two years, I'll be saving even more from it.
Btw, not only are unlocked phones nicer to have in case of travelling/switching providers, you also aren't stuck with the customized provider firmware that they slap onto the phone. From past experiences I've found that the branded firmware often limits advanced functionality.
Prove it.
I have an original Samsung Blackjack (i607).
It's a Windows Mobile phone (5, and Samsung put out a new image with 6 for free).
My unlimited 3G data plan is $25 / month.
I can tether my phone to my PC/Laptop/whatever and use it as a modem.
This is a feature of the phone, and not the wireless carrier. The wireless carrier has no idea what's going on. My phone gets data as it would regardless of whether or not I'm tethering. My phone then sends that over USB to my device (my phone doesn't have WiFi).
I'll never be "upgrading" my contract with AT&T.
The difference is "unlimited" vs unlimited.
If you read through the "unlimited" for home use is "*unlimited based on our internal estimation of how much a home user should use per month".
The corporate unlimited is truly unlimited.
Not a stupid tax, but just as deceptive.
Actually they will, after they and your new carrier merge.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
iPhones receive a link to ATT's gateway via SMS when someone sends them an MMS.
ATT's gateway works maybe 4%-5% of the time. Sometimes it reports no pic available, sometimes it just doesn't work and doesn't say why, sometimes it refuses the login credentials.
And speaking of login credentials, they arrive with the SMS. An alphanumeric code of about 8 digits and a concatenation of 2 words to be used as a password. These have to be written down on paper because clicking the link opens Safari but doesn't fill in the credentials, and they aren't exactly easy to remember for the time it takes to open the gateway over Edge/3G.
Flipping back and forth between the SMS app and Safari works, but Apple has built so much lag into the iphone OS that a pencil and paper is faster. That and sometimes the page refreshes and blanks out any characters that have been filled in so you have to start over.
So no, MMS gateways aren't a decent solution and I don't even like MMS.
"Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
Say what? The iPhone is the only smart phone I've ever seen that doesn't get MMS - I've had Blackberry's that do, a T-mobile MDA (WinMo), my Nokia N95 and Communicator.
O2 are charging £14.68 a month for tethering, with a 3GB cap or £29.36 for 10GB. It's not available on Pay & Go. http://shop.o2.co.uk/update/internet.html
"Impartiality is a pompous name for indifference, which is an elegant name for ignorance." - G.K. Chesterton
Ed Whiteacre helped create the net neutrality movement by claiming that providers like Google should pay for the content they deliver even though they and each of their users are already paying for their connections.
He started with SBC and after a number of acquistions renamed the company to AT&T. He's a take no-prisoners, trample the employees and customers kind of guy. If AT&T is getting better, I'd guess it's because he's no longer there.
Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok