Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

iPad Bait and Switch — No More Unlimited Data Plan

Posted by kdawson on from the nice-while-it-lasted dept.

_KiTA_ writes "AT&T announced today that the iPhone will gain tethering, finally, at an extra $20 a month, but only for people on a new 2GB a month plan. They also quietly announced at the same time the real news — that the $30 Unlimited Data plan on the iPad 3G will be axed in lieu of the same data plan. Yes, this would be the same 'revolutionary data plan' that Steve Jobs was so proud of during the iPad unveiling — it lasted just a month after the 3G model was delayed to May 7. People feeling vibes of previous Apple iDevice releases are not alone. Existing accounts will be allowed to grandfather in, although Apple has removed the ability to purchase the iPad from the online store at this time, and AT&T has a history of changing its plans without warning. Finally, there is no word on what happens if you ever let your Unlimited plan lapse for a month at this time."

104 of 670 comments (clear)

  1. Hmmm by crow_t_robot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Congrats to the early adopters, I guess. Apparently, these two companies are making so much money that they can just do whatever they want now without repercussion.

    1. Re:Hmmm by maxume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, how terrible that they are changing the terms that they are offering to new customers. Vile. Just vile.

      I guess it's a bit of a bummer for the people that paid extra for the 3G with the idea that they might activate it only now and then, but I'm not sure they should have expected the terms to last forever (but expecting the terms to last for more than a month probably isn't crazy).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:Hmmm by LordNimon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Goodbuy, browsing /. in the bathroom!

      First of all, it's "goodbye", not "goodbuy". Second, you don't have a wireless router in your house? Even with the unlimited 3G plan, using 802.11 is always better.

      --
      And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
      To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
    3. Re:Hmmm by ArsonSmith · · Score: 2, Funny

      I haven't found a wireless router with a 56.6k modem on it yet. I live in the US you upitty high speed internet user!! (or insensitive clod)

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    4. Re:Hmmm by davester666 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Um, this ain't Apple. It's AT&T that's changing their available contract terms...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    5. Re:Hmmm by delinear · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Garnering massive amounts of free publicity about your revolutionary new data plans, then dropping them without similar fanfare a couple of months later sounds a little underhand, you have to admit. There's no way this was a short term decision, they must have known about this in advance, the least these companies can do is be honest - most people resent the fact that it seems like they're being gamed more than they resent the changes themselves, and I know it's naive and that's just the way the world works, but it doesn't mean doesn't royally suck.

  2. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by mp3LM · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm going to go out on a limb ... from just the summary it would appear that this has very little to do with actions from Apple and has to do with actions from AT&T. If we were required to pick a 'bad guy' in this situation the choice would clearly be AT&T. However, everyone knew it was just a matter of time before tiered data plans started and unlimited stopped as it just makes sense. Yeah no...I get it...free and cheap is nicer...but I'd rather have the tiered data plan then have them go out of business and have nothing.

  3. This is crazy, but not surprising. by Miros · · Score: 2, Insightful

    AT&T knows that it will lose its shirt selling unlimited dataplans in the long run, particularly on a device like the iPad which will probably be even worse for them in terms of bandwidth consumption than the iPhone. Still sucks though, and still has that unsavory characteristic of a bait-and-switch. Well folks, it looks like AT&T decided to show up for the "get rich quick off the iPad party" after all. He makes a foul guest.

    1. Re:This is crazy, but not surprising. by Miros · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not untenable, we're just in a transition phase. At some point wireless networks will have capacity that far exceeds demand, and the carriers will collapse into a price war (Bertrand Competition) which will result in what we would now probably consider a good data-plan becoming virtually free at some point. This is the same thing that happened to phone companies with local and then long distance service, as well as a host of other industries over time. Sucks for AT&T, and Verizon though (Sprint probably wont make it). Sure, they're making stupid amounts of cash (billions and billions of profit per quarter) but they know where this road goes and they are trying really hard to change course to keep from getting right back to where they all started -- in the POTS business of the future.

    2. Re:This is crazy, but not surprising. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not untenable, we're just in a transition phase. At some point wireless networks will have capacity that far exceeds demand, and the carriers will collapse into a price war.

      What, you mean a similar price war that so quickly broke out for SMS messages?

    3. Re:This is crazy, but not surprising. by Luckyo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't understand this statement. Here in Nordic countries, mobile operators are actively advertising 3G internet as something that average people would want to replace their normal home DSL/cable with. I would assume normal home connections eat a whole lot more bandwidth then any smart phone/tablet. It's very profitable when you do it right.

      I think you actually mean "AT&T knows that it will earn more money selling non-unlimited data plans..." This is quite likely, especially considering how much it usually costs to go over, and how well apple fans have rolled over when it came to moving extra money out of their pockets and into apple/apple subsidiaries' pockets. Also known as "profit margin".

    4. Re:This is crazy, but not surprising. by Miros · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes you are correct, it is really just a difference in terminology though, we mean the same thing. If the service they are providing becomes effectively commoditized and they begin competing on price their profit margins will shrink dramatically, possibly even to a level where they will not be able to afford to perform dramatic network upgrades as frequently as they are now. Of course, if that were to happen it would probably only be after the networks provided sufficient bandwidth to satisfy pretty much everyone or a new superior technology had emerged which did not require the massive infrastructure and spectrum investments that the entrenched firms have already made to reach the consumers.

    5. Re:This is crazy, but not surprising. by atamido · · Score: 3, Insightful

      At some point wireless networks will have capacity that far exceeds demand

      This is so absurdly wrong that I'm doing away with moderating in this discussion to comment.

      With a wired network you can always run more wire and fiber to increase bandwidth and create full duplex communication. You can multiplex different signals through the same fiber. You can do all of these things to continually increase bandwidth to a location because you can protect the signals from interference by a millimeter of shielding.

      With a wireless network you have a limited number of frequencies that are usable. Only a limited number that aren't blocked/reflected by sheetrock, a piece of paper, or water vapor in the air. And the frequencies that do work get interference from reflections, devices that leak EM, and other broadcasting towers. For a given range of frequencies (the bandwidth) there are hard and fast rules about how many bits you can transmit. Not technological limitations, these are laws of the universe.

      The only way to work around this is to make the cells smaller, which means you need more towers, and more costs. Say that you have 6 towers to cover an area, if you halve designed transmit distance, you'd need 24 towers to cover the same area. And that only works so far because you have to balance transmit distance with still having enough power to transmit though walls.

      Perhaps if some sort of quantum entanglement method is created for cell phones that doesn't require EM radiation to operate, then unlimited wireless for everyone will be a reality. Until that point it's just delusions.

    6. Re:This is crazy, but not surprising. by Kooonsty · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not untenable, we're just in a transition phase. At some point wireless networks will have capacity that far exceeds demand, and the carriers will collapse into a price war (Bertrand Competition) which will result in what we would now probably consider a good data-plan becoming virtually free at some point. This is the same thing that happened to phone companies with local and then long distance service, as well as a host of other industries over time. Sucks for AT&T, and Verizon though (Sprint probably wont make it). Sure, they're making stupid amounts of cash (billions and billions of profit per quarter) but they know where this road goes and they are trying really hard to change course to keep from getting right back to where they all started -- in the POTS business of the future.

      Just like how texting is virtually free now right?

    7. Re:This is crazy, but not surprising. by CAIMLAS · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How, exactly, would they lose their shirts?

      I get cable service to my house for something just short of $30/month - I don't pay much attention to the bills. It's pretty shoddy service as far as cable is concerned - only 5Mbit/2Mbit.

      But it's under $30. For this cable installation they need to put in:
      * Reels of very expensive copper cable.
      * Fiber between neighborhoods.
      * Relay boxes/aggregators/whatever they call them in each neighborhood.
      * VoIP analog boxes on every house, whether they're using phone service or not.

      All those trucks, cables, "installation specialists", etc. don't come cheap. Oh yeah, and there's no (significant) degradation to service from QoS or port blocking, either (port 80 works just fine).

      Furthermore: it's not like it's just "install and forget" for them. They're constantly uprooting streets to put in new runs/replace old runs, upgrading infrastructure, and the like.

      Oh yeah, I forgot to mention... there's competition in this demographic, albeit just barely. But it exists. And both companies are quite profitable (and growing) despite the relatively small domain in which they operate.

      So what's AT&T's beef that they can't provide Internet ('unlimited' but throttled bandwidth) at twice the cost, with a fraction of the necessary physical infrastructure? Somehow, I doubt maintaining a radio on top of a hill (or licensing the frequency) compares to the costs of landlines. If local radio stations can still afford to operate with only OTA ads, what's ATT's problem? The relative income from $50+/month subscribers is certainly higher than local radio ads.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  4. Luxury items by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Luxury prices. You want it, you get it, now shut up. I'll keep my PC, thankyouverymuch.

  5. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by SimonTheSoundMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This has nothing to do with Apple, AT&T are doing this. I doubt Apple knew anything about this.

  6. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by FPCat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think you've confused Apple and AT&T. This is an obvious sign that the new iPhone won't be AT&T exclusive. AT&T is trying to get a last minuet surge by allowing people that sign up by June 7th to get the old rates. When the new phone is announced AT&T's iPhone business will take a major hit

  7. Why the Tech industry sucks. by bsDaemon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Outside of tech and telecom, are there any industries that can get away with "reserving the right" to "change the terms of this agreement without notice" or to sell products without "any implied fitness for merchantability or usefulness for any purpose"? Car companies and real estate deals could never operate with this kind of crap -- people just wouldn't stand for it.

    1. Re:Why the Tech industry sucks. by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I once read the back of a Greyhound ticket, and I am pretty sure it said something to the effect of "change the terms of this agreement without notice." Now, I would not say it is really a comparison, since they would be hard pressed to charge people extra for a ticket they already purchased or to pull other "bait and switch" schemes, but that sort of legalese is not really unique to tech companies.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    2. Re:Why the Tech industry sucks. by node+3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You got +5 Interesting, but are entirely off topic. AT&T are changing the plans they offer, existing customers don't lose their current plans.

    3. Re:Why the Tech industry sucks. by boaworm · · Score: 2, Informative

      How about the airline industry? They can decide to do a lot of stuff on-the-fly. Like cancel your flight. Or have you pre-pay for a specific seat and when you board they tell you that the airplane has a different layout and that you will end up sitting somewhere else.

      Or change how much luggage you can bring on board. Or what can be in that luggage. I'm very sure you cannot claim that it was allowed to bring a bottle of something on board at the time I purchased my ticket, so I want to bring it on board now.

      Hell, they can even fly you to an alternate airport and put you on a 6 hour bus ride.

      And you mention real-estate. The world is changing, you bought something with an ocean view. But all of a sudden a group of new houses are built.

      Or hotels. You booked a room, but when you arrive they only have a twin instead of a double.

      I'm sure we can find the same examples in restaurants.

      Changing ToS is by no means isolated to telecom.

      --
      Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities.
      Aristotele
    4. Re:Why the Tech industry sucks. by bsDaemon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Re: airlines -- there are legitimate changes in logistics due to mechanical failure, weather pattern changes, volcanoes, whatever else have you, that can affect what planes or crew are available, or whether or not the flight can safely take off.

      I'm sure there are examples in other industries of this sort of thing happening from time-to-time, but it just seems to me to be endemic in tech and telecom. Look at software for instance -- "pay s $300 for the right to use what's on this plastic disk, but not ownership, and btw -- we're not going to promise that what's on the plastic disk does anything, anyway." That's just dicked up.

    5. Re:Why the Tech industry sucks. by chrish · · Score: 2, Insightful

      iPhones aren't locked to a specific carrier in Canada, you can get them on Rogers, Bell or Telus.

      And yet, amazingly, all three offer identical plans at identical rates.

      Purely coincidental, of course, there's no collusion in telecommunications, just like there's no collusion at the gas pumps.

      When iPad and iPhone are available on other US carriers, you have exactly the same situation to look forward to. You'll be able to get exactly the same plan at exactly the same price from any of 2-3 different "competitors".

      --
      - chrish
  8. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    AT&T is in no danger of going out of business offering unlimited plans. Bandwidth is measured in throughput, not transfer.

  9. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Of course, had Apple not produced a locked down, proprietary iPhone, we would have been tethering all along, and it would be easy to assign blame to AT&T. From where I sit, Apple is helping AT&T, and while they may not be the only company to do so, it is certainly not the case that Apple is completely innocent here.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  10. And the justification starts... by calderra · · Score: 4, Funny

    This isn't bait and switch- this is clearly STEVE JOBS' ORIGINAL VISION! Only now has technology caught up to his masterful insight, such that the product and the plans he always envisioned can be offered together!

    1. Re:And the justification starts... by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 5, Funny

      Man I need to get some sleep, for a moment I swore you were talking about George Lucas.

  11. Still Unlimited! by clinko · · Score: 5, Funny

    2gigs times 0k/sec

    At this rate we all have an unlimited plan!

  12. Complain Much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I agree that losing the unlimited plan isn't great, and that the new plans should be set higher than 200MB and 2GB per month.

    Other than that you are off base. You can purchase the iPad online at Apple's website. How would you like AT&T to notify you of changing plans? They are changing the plans with a week's notice, if you don't like the new plan you don't have to switch to it. Simple. The new 200MB plan would probably work for most people and save them money since they have wifi in their home and work. Comparing it to the price drop of the original iPhone is ridiculous.

    I'm guessing you don't have an iPad, but just want to complain.

    1. Re:Complain Much? by Pros_n_Cons · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The new 200MB plan would probably work for most people and save them money since they have wifi in their home and work.

      What plan should people get if they can get 3G but not cable or DSL where they live?

      This is me. i use sprint 3g on a mobile card, and am looking into using the EVO as a hotspot. I can see att losing many customers this way. but perhaps thats the plan. getting rid of the data suckers is cheaper than building better infrastructure?

      --

      -- "of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong." --Dennis Miller
  13. Doesn't anyone remember their slogan? by wandazulu · · Score: 5, Funny

    "We're not happy until you are not happy"

    1. Re:Doesn't anyone remember their slogan? by tresstatus · · Score: 2, Informative

      i thought that was reel big fish's slogan.....

      --
      stephen
    2. Re:Doesn't anyone remember their slogan? by ALeavitt · · Score: 4, Informative

      Maybe you don't remember their slogan:
      We don't care. We don't have to. We're the Phone Company.

      --
      This sig has been stolen. Return it to its original user for a reward.
  14. Not Just The iPad/iPhone - It's All Smartphones by rsmith-mac · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At first like the submitter I thought this was only for the iPhone and iPad, but after checking the press release from AT&T it turns out it's for all Smartphones. So these are the new data plans for the iPhone, the iPad, the Nexus One (and all other Android phones), the N900 - everything.

    AT&T claims that this will bring down bills for the average user, and I don't doubt this is true. However the better the Smartphone the easier it is to burn through data, so this seems to be a tactical strike against all high-end Smartphone users, and a blatant attempt to drive away iPad users (2GB for an entire month of browsing on a 10" device, really?). And this is timed to coincide with the launch of the next-gen iPhone, which is widely beleived to have a front-facing camera for video conferencing, which would burn through additional data. I also don't know how you're going to get away with significant video streaming on 2GB a month, but perhaps that's the idea?

    Progress, it seems, is getting less for more. Ultimately the 5GB of data that actually came with an "unlimited" plan is now $25 + $30 in overages. It continues to amaze me just how far we've come since 2008...

    1. Re:Not Just The iPad/iPhone - It's All Smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      An obvious result.

      No doubt the carriers _are_ exploiting the situation to make bank on overage changes, but the underlying issue is the same as it always has been: the 2G and 3G (hell, even 4G if what we're hearing about the real-life performance) networks simply don't and can't support the kind of massive bandwidth demands that any significant number of smartphone, tablet and tethered PC-users will put on a cell.

      It's simple math. The limited bandwidth to/from the tower is shared by all the handsets in the vicinity..

    2. Re:Not Just The iPad/iPhone - It's All Smartphones by Noone+Thirty · · Score: 5, Funny

      Noone can deliver.

      I know what the ladies like.

    3. Re:Not Just The iPad/iPhone - It's All Smartphones by mapkinase · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Switching from unlimited to a meter will have an effect on web advertising as well. Nobody in the right mind wants to pay for downloading ad videos.

      Personally, I would welcome text-only internet if it comes to it. I kind of miss the environment of academy-only days of bitnet, email lists, usenet and gopher.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    4. Re:Not Just The iPad/iPhone - It's All Smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I was outraged when I saw the press release, then a friend calmly asked how many GB of data I use. After going through the last 6 months of bill statements, it looks like I use anywhere from 140 - 200 MB per month. I use data pretty indiscriminately, so I assumed my usage numbers would be much higher.

      AT&T is lowering my bill by $15/month? My mind has been blown.

  15. And just before the new iPhone ships too by Gr8Apes · · Score: 3, Insightful

    well, this will put a crimp in whether to purchase that snazzy new iPhone purportedly coming out this month. Nice, AT&T. First we find out that yes, AT&T has a 5 year exclusive deal, so yes, you will only be able to buy the new iPhone on AT&T's crappy network because you'll be there for 2 years. But now with the 2GB cap (tethered only? Or do you have the option of the original unlimited without it? The TFA doesn't say) it all of a sudden becomes hmmmm, should I? Maybe a Droid isn't so bad after all despite its shortcomings in usability.

    The long and the short of this one is: guess I won't jump to the phone I really wanted if there is no unlimited plan, as I'm not interested in getting walloped with that nice $1/MB or whatever they're charging as overrage fees.

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  16. Apple is like a new girlfriend... by PmanAce · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...it's all fun and stuff in the beginning until you hit reality. Next.

    --
    Tired of my customary (Score:1)
  17. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by nine-times · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah no...I get it...free and cheap is nicer...but I'd rather have the tiered data plan then have them go out of business and have nothing.

    What makes you think that was the choice? Is AT&T on the verge of bankruptcy and I haven't heard?

    I'm a bit tired of people implying that we should sympathize with these companies by saying, "But they had to screw our customers and engage in shady and unscrupulous behavior! The only other option is to give everything away for free, and they'd go out of business!" Meanwhile these companies are raking in billions of dollars in profit.

  18. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How is this insightful? is this Fox News? AT&T controls the network, Apple does not. Why would Apple care if you tether the iPhone? Apple wants you to use the iPhone, period.

    By your failed logic, Apple would disallow tethering outside of the USA, which of course is not the case. This is simply AT&T dictating the use of their network.

  19. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by Miros · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They are in danger of becoming dumb, fat, pipes and then collapsing into Bertrand. Artificially restricting service to produce multiple levels is just the first step in a whole big plan to can-opener themselves back into a more powerful spot in the value chain for mobile.

  20. Slashdot ranting a bit here... by cwingrav · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, they are producing two new dataplans that are cheaper then the current that they say cover 98% of their use base. To me, I think this means I'm going to at least save $5 a month here. Also, tethering is FINALLY announced! I'm excited with this news! I would like unlimited tethering but I work with technology and realize not all things are feasible as continued unlimited plans, especially with tethering, would destroy an already slammed network.

    Slashdot seems to be missing reality here and the compromise that AT&T is making with their network. Ok, hit me with all your complaints about how evil something or other is.

    1. Re:Slashdot ranting a bit here... by cwingrav · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just checked wife's data usage since she uses her phone constantly. She used 145MBs last month which was the highest since she's had the phone. So, we're going to save $15 a month and not subsidizing the high data users. Also, I'm going to get a phone as I can now tether. I think a lot of people are getting mad before exploring this.

      BTW. Older plans are grandfathered in and according to AT&T are not going to be dropped even when you upgrade to a new phone.

    2. Re:Slashdot ranting a bit here... by discojohnson · · Score: 2, Informative

      We all love anecdotal evidence, and mine is 100-275MB/mo on wife's phone (Blackjack II) who is mostly email and lots of facebook, while my iPhone 3G usage is 500-1400MB/mo and I am definitely a power user (casual online games, push email for work, lots of internet referencing, and even RDP and some SOCKS tethering when on the road). This is over the past 14 months, so I suggest those freaking out to at least take a peek and see if they will actually be affected.

  21. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by cybereal · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Indeed. However it's worth noting that almost all of this information is based on reinterpreted rumor. I wouldn't be surprised to see a clarification within the next week or so that changes some of these details for the iPad.

    iPhone though... well sure. This was a long time coming. I consider myself a moderate data user on 3G (lots of data but no streaming video/audio) and my usage has peaked at 540mb in a month, but usually sits around 300mb. I do all my email, push from work as well, so it's not as though I'm really a light user in disguise. Even better, with the $15 option I can cut my bill because my wife peaks at about 100mb a month usually sitting at about 50mb as she is home most of the time, well in range of Wi-Fi.

    In the end I'll save $20 cutting down plan costs, just enough to enable tethering if I ever need it... though so far, I've never needed such a feature (Wi-Fi is everywhere around here and I don't travel.)

    I do hope there is a clarification on iPad 3G. I can imagine Stevie's inbox is packed with "WTF" letters right now. Given the way the data plans were announced alongside the iPad, I would be surprised if Apple is happy about this change. In fact, one could construe this as an act by AT&T against Apple, supporting the rumors that Apple is going to produce iPhones for competing networks.

    Exciting times!

    --
    I read the script, and I think it would help my character's motivation if he was on fire. -Bender
  22. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by Lythrdskynrd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm going to go out on a limb ... from just the summary it would appear that this has very little to do with actions from Apple and has to do with actions from AT&T. If we were required to pick a 'bad guy' in this situation the choice would clearly be AT&T. However, everyone knew it was just a matter of time before tiered data plans started and unlimited stopped as it just makes sense. Yeah no...I get it...free and cheap is nicer...but I'd rather have the tiered data plan then have them go out of business and have nothing.

    Really? Have you read none of the articles on what the markup is for a Gigabyte of data bandwidth; on a text message? Please. Nobody is going to see AT&T go out of business. I hope they get their arses handed to them in a class action suit.

  23. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by Sepultura · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But it is easy to assign blame to AT&T. In the rest of the world we have tethering, and always have. We also have competition. Up here in Canada pretty much every cell carrier (at least all that carry smart phones) sell the iPhone, and you can tether. When my wife bought her new iPhone from Telus tethering was one of the promotional points they used to sell it to her. Not only that, but a telus rep helped her to figure out how to set up a VOIP system at home (through another company) with a "digital receptionist" feature that allows her to call home for free from anywhere in Canada and then connect over VOIP to anywhere in the world at the VOIP rate. I thought that was pretty decent.

    So it's not exactly fair to say it's Apple's fault. What would be fair would be to ask why in the hell they're sticking with AT&T in the first place - it's like Randell Stephenson has some compromising pictures of Jobs with a goat. Or worse yet, Woz.

  24. Credit card companies, airlines,... by forand · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Credit card companies and airlines do these things quite often. Ever get a notice in the mail that your APR on your credit card went up? They just changed the contract. Ever had a flight canceled but be charged to reschedule? They changed the contract on you. All because they reserved the right in the original contract to do so. I am baffled, however, how any such contract can be considered legal and binding, it clearly favors one party to a ludicrous degree and provides no method for a resolution of changes for BOTH parties (one side dictates all the terms).

    1. Re:Credit card companies, airlines,... by Dog-Cow · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is illegal (in the US) for an airline to do that to you. If they cancel a flight (or even if circumstances force a cancellation), they have to provide you with an alternate flight. They even have to pay for accommodations if the next available flight is the next day.

      If you use any kind of travel agency, they are free to charge you whatever they'd like for the rescheduling.

    2. Re:Credit card companies, airlines,... by Late+Adopter · · Score: 3, Informative

      Credit cards in particular, are handled by the card companies (and by the law) in a way very different from the way consumers look at them. From the credit card company's point of view, they are establishing a loan to you FOR THE BILLING PERIOD, at that month's apr. If you choose to "revolve" the loan into the next billing period, that's a whole new agreement, which you're free to take or leave, understanding that "leaving" requires paying off your loan in full.

    3. Re:Credit card companies, airlines,... by cervo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They can get out of this by claiming weather or other factors out of their control.... Similarly they can use these excuses to get out of causing a missed connection....

  25. APPL by cosm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Let me do everybody a favor:

    apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple apple

    Ok, now that that's out of our system, can we talk about something else for once?

    --
    'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
  26. Google FTW. by headhot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I heart my Nexus 1. Not being tied to a carrier.

    Shell out the bucks out front. You'll save it in the long run.

  27. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Please inform Supreme Commander Jobs that we have found another human immune to the Reality Distortion Field. He will be dealt with the usual way.

  28. Rethinking Possible - read the fine print by tananda · · Score: 4, Informative

    OK guys, calm down.

    If you already have an iPad, you can get grandfathered in, and AT&T /can not/ legally change your plan once you're on it (read your terms and conditions, it's in there. slamming and cramming = bad). Grandfathered plans /will not/ be removed unless the feature actually gets removed from your account.. and you (or someone with access to your account.. don't give out your SSN and/or passcode) are the only one who can authorize that.. (and if it gets removed by accident and it WASN'T authorized.. well.. it /can/ be added back.. you just need to get a manager to override it).

    Furthermore.. iPhone tethering has always been available.. it's called a jailbreak. It's not hard. Just google "spirit jailbreak" and in less than 10 minutes you'll have Cydia and can download the tethering app of your choice, whether AT&T likes it or not. Poof, iPhone tethering with unlimited data, no need to wait for Apple to release OS4 to the iPhone and then get put on a 2gb plan for the iPhone as well -- keep your iphone unlimited data forever if you want. 3

    --
    I used to think Peter Shipley was cool. Then I aged past 16.
    1. Re:Rethinking Possible - read the fine print by MistrBlank · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Those iPad owners are grandfathered in, as long as they keep paying on that plan.

      Part of the allure of the iPad was being able to drop and pick up the plan AT WILL because you are not locked in to a contract. They will no longer be able to do so.

  29. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by erroneus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Slashdotters have seen this for a long time. Unfortunately, many who complain about Apple get modded as troll and face the same old "if you don't like it, don't buy it" nonsense which completely ignores the potential damage that can result in the PC and Mobile device markets at large. It's rather like the game DRM discussions where people say don't buy blizzard or whatever game maker is installing ridiculous measures that manage to get cracked before it hits the store shelves. It's not about the publisher or manufacturer specifically, but rather it is about potential industry trends that we would like to see stopped before it catches on. And while it is true that the "don't buy it" thing sends a sort of message to people who are doing it or are interested in doing it, nothing says it better than massive complaints and comments directly from users here and later elsewhere and directly to the sellers which is what I, personally, advocate. After all, just not buying it means "someone is pirating it!"

  30. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by Culture20 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course, had Apple not produced a locked down, proprietary iPhone, we would have been tethering all along, and it would be easy to assign blame to AT&T. From where I sit, Apple is helping AT&T

    They're not just helping AT&T, they're in a symbiotic relationship.
    Full disclosure, I own an iPhone.

    Apple: "Customer, dear customer, you want tethering? Well, it's in the App Store from a company called Null River."
    AT&T: "No it's not."
    Average iPhone Customers: "What's tethering?"
    Apple: "We pulled the app for review, but will bring it back shortly."
    AT&T: "No you won't"
    Customers: "Want tethering even MORE now!"
    Apple: "If you buy the new iPhone 3Gs you can now get tethering!"
    AT&T: "No you can't."
    Apple: "If you buy the new iPhone 3Gs [in a country other than USA] you can now get tethering!"
    Customers: "Tethering! *frothing* Tethering!"
    Apple: "We worked out a remarkable deal with AT&T, and now you can tether! Buy an iPhone 4G today!"
    Customers: "Tethering! See, I knew tethering would happen if I just bought enough iPhones!"
    AT&T: "Sure, it's true, you can tether, but at a rate that it will be useless for laptops. And pay more for the reduced network bandwidth losers! Ahahahahaha!"
    Apple: "Look at all these iPhone moneys! We can haz cheeseburger now."
    Null River: "Um, what the hell happened?"

  31. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by sonicmerlin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You do realize tethering for the iPhone is available outside the US, and has been for a long time?

  32. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by Dog-Cow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And thus the $20 extra charge for tethering. There was no need to cut the $30/unlimited plan just to introduce tethering. Anyone giving this even the slightest thought knew that AT&T was going to charge a huge surcharge to enable tethering.

  33. Re:Who is evil here? by hedwards · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Since evil is available in infinite supply, I'd say they're both evil as well as MS and Google while we're at it. Since I've still got evil to spare, I think that the US government is also evil for allowing our money to subsidized Israeli war crimes.

    But seriously, this is /. either it's anti-Apple or pro-Apple we don't allow them moderates in here.

  34. Abso-fing-lutely by Overzeetop · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Screw AT&T - take your Nexus One you've got on AT&T's network and get a plan from Verizon!

    Oh, it doesn't work on Verizon. Well, fuck that - go to Sprint!

    Oh, it doesn't work on Sprint either. Damn it, go use T-moboile!

    Oh, it won't do data on their high speed network.

    See, even if you buy your own hardware, the lack of cellular data standards will fuck you over anyway. Unless, of course, you want to buy another unsubsidized phone, in which case you can pay an extra $600 (=$25/mo for two years) to switch.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:Abso-fing-lutely by subsonic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Or you could have planned a bit and bought the T-mobile 3G compatible Nexus One. you still had a choice and control (not much, but some), and if you realize you made a mistake, returning the phone would only cost you a restocking fee, still much cheaper than having to pay a penalty. And over the two year span that you're NOT paying the premium of the "rent to own" phone you save about$20 per month on your bill. Also, you'll be able to change your plan whenever you want to and not incur an extension of your contract. Not to mention your unlocked phone will work in more places internationally.

  35. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by teg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Of course, had Apple not produced a locked down, proprietary iPhone, we would have been tethering all along, and it would be easy to assign blame to AT&T. From where I sit, Apple is helping AT&T, and while they may not be the only company to do so, it is certainly not the case that Apple is completely innocent here.

    Since Verizon and Sprint don't use GSM like the rest of the world, "being locked down to AT&T" in the US means "not making a separate, completely different model from what the rest of the world uses for Verizon and Sprint". It's not as easy as just having an exclusivity deal expire. Using different networks is one way the US carriers can avoid having the market be as competitive as in Europe.

  36. Re:N900 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    The N900 uses a 3G band (1700 MHz) that few carriers in North America support. T-Mobile does, but most others use 1900 MHz, which makes the N900 not able to do 3G on most North American networks.

  37. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by ukdmbfan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Apple is the one that has required that you use AT&T if you want to use their products.

    Then don't use them. People act like this is hard or something. Apple is not heroin, it's just capitalistic.

    Anybody want to start the countdown until a new model iMac has an AT&T lock-in too? Maybe just a entry-level model, but still...

    This is so hilariously out-of-touch with reality that your previous statement now makes perfect sense.

    --
    "If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all"
  38. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by Eponymous+Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And if there is sufficient competition, they won't succeed. In a functioning free market, the price of their service should approach the cost of offering it. If they are able to artificially restrict service, then it's obvious more competition is needed.

  39. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by Miros · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You are right. What's interesting here is that the result can be the same as that of perfect competition but with a duopoly. In this case it would be very difficult if not impossible for a company to decide today that they want to be a national wireless service provider built on their own infrastructure. The problem is even if they could finance the construction of all of the network infrastructure they would never be able to compete on price. They would have to pay off the debt they used to construct the network, but they are competing against companies that have been amortizing those costs over a decade or more. They wouldn't have a prayer.

  40. Litigation costs money by tepples · · Score: 2, Interesting

    nor is it enforceable.

    It's enforceable if paying what the contract says would cost an individual customer less than hiring a lawyer to get a judge to declare it unenforceable.

  41. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by MattSausage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And once you create this competition, I will be the first to sign up for your cheaper, unlimited bandwidth. The free market is as much an idealized unattainable as the Star Trek no money communism utopia. It is great, in theory, but simply put, the cost of entry into most markets is too high, and thus a truly free market will never exist, because those in the market want to keep competition to a minimum.

    Pretty much the same thing can be said about democracy I suppose.

  42. Always has been... by Overzeetop · · Score: 3, Interesting

    (on AT&T)
    Tethering has always been more.
    There have always been limits
      -tethering was limited by the TOS
      -a USB modem plan was $55 for 5GB (which is what the iPad is)
      -a USB modem plan was $30 for 200MB
    Apple forced a sweetheart deal on data with the iPhone so it would really shine (can you imagine an iPhone without data?), and AT&T's reputation suffered as a result of the onslaught of data usage.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  43. Re:The short story. by MistrBlank · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Or I could just jailbreak my iPhone and give AT&T the finger.

  44. Or consider Cournot by tepples · · Score: 2, Informative

    They are in danger of becoming dumb, fat, pipes and then collapsing into Bertrand.

    What makes you think they'll go Bertrand and not Cournot?

  45. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by English+French+Man · · Score: 3, Insightful

    By your failed logic, Apple would disallow tethering outside of the USA, which of course is not the case. This is simply AT&T dictating the use of their network.

    This isn't exactly true. iPhone doesn't have tethering either here in France for instance; of course, I am not aware of every place in the world, but as tethering is available on android phones, and it doesn't seem to bother network operators, I wouldn't say that Apple is completely unblamable.

    --
    If I'm wrong, please correct me ; learning is better than being right.
  46. Demand Credits for every ad you download. by tekrat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you're limited to 2GB of data, and half of that data turns out to be web-based advertising you don't want, then call up AT&T customer service *every time* you download an ad, and demand a credit to your 2GB limit.

    After all, if you started getting unwanted text messages every time you got on your phone, and you were paying 20 cents per text message, I bet you'd call them up to demand a credit. Or let's say you recieved long, unsolicited sales calls about buying time-shares or something on your cell, which you are paying airtime for, and I bet you'd complain.

    So, the only way to get them to change is to cost them a zillion dollars in customer service time by calling them up EVERY TIME you download an ad. Otherwise, you're paying twice.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:Demand Credits for every ad you download. by Wireless+Joe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So you want AT&T (and all other providers) to be a dumb pipe or not? This form of action would just be opening the door to traffic shaping, preferential treatment, etc; basically everything net neutrality is against. Do you really want to give AT&T an excuse to monitor the content you access?

  47. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by xaxa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You can artificially introduce competition by requiring the companies that own the infrastructure to lease it at a fair price to competitors (or you could tell them to sort it out themselves, without the need for legislation).

    MVNO.

  48. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by Miros · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yes, this has happened before in almost the same industry with long distance lines and local service provider colocation.

  49. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What makes you think that US wireless service (or much of any other U.S. industry for that matter) is a functioning free market?

    It's huge companies operating in a virtual trust structure. You have no real choice... just varying degrees of bad.

  50. Re:BP (was: Apple versus Microsoft) by tekrat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah! And BP *had* to ignore all those safety protocols or else they wouldn't have been profitable and they would have gone out of business. Let's forgive them too! After all, they only way the could have survived was to dump 800 gazillion gallons of oil into a Louisiana swamp. And then run away.

    In other words, I agree. Stop apologizing for giant corporations who happily screw you in the name of profits. The CEO of AT&T probably makes enough in bonuses alone to pay for everyone's unlimited data plans. He probably spends more on lunch than you make in a year. This year's new yacht could probably cover everyone's data plans handily.

    Stop being apologists. Those guys can get by on normal salaries just like you and me. They won't starve to death if they are forced to only make a million a year instead of 20 million. If executive pay weren't so ludicrous, I'm sure large companies would be even more profitable, and yet, you're happliy giving them even more of your money in return for even less -- just so a few can retain their mansions, and the company can be even more profitable doing less.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  51. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by iivel · · Score: 4, Informative

    Unfortunately in the US (and many other countries), this would involve jailbreaking the iPhone.

  52. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by Raistlin77 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...Do you pay more to your ISP if you connect a router and two different computers?...

    There was a time that every large cable and DSL provider would cripple your connection if they detected a router connected to your modem. For them to un-cripple it (that is, allow the MAC address of your router on their network), many of them charged ridiculous fees. They would often charge more based on the number of computers you told them you were connecting (only idiots were truthful).

  53. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by protektor · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The reality is in this day and age, all internet pipes are pretty much the same. Or at least they should be unless the company screws up their own network design somehow. The only difference, in reality, is if a network is oversold or not, other than that all networks are the same pretty much. So basically everyone is selling dumb, fat pipes to everyone. The only issue is who actually has more bandwidth and isn't over selling their network and promising you pie in the sky about bandwidth they don't really have.

  54. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by nabsltd · · Score: 3, Informative

    The free market is as much an idealized unattainable as the Star Trek no money communism utopia.

    Since pretty much every incarnation of Star Trek depicted the use of "money" (i.e., a token that has no intrinsic value of its own, but has been defined to have value by the government), I guess the free market is quite attainable.

    What confuses people is that 95% of Star Trek episodes are set on the ship or in a diplomatic situation. On current US warships, sailors don't need money for very much other than gambling among themselves...meals are free, etc. Why should the starship Enterprise be any different?

    In diplomatic situations, the host country (planet) doesn't make the guests pay for their food and entertainment at the state dinners, and often lets them use housing that is set aside for such occasions.

    But, the crew paid for food and drinks in restaurants and bars, tribbles cost money to purchase, and bribes were paid for information.

  55. If it matters... by ajdowntown · · Score: 2, Informative

    If it matters to anyone, I just checked with my iPad and was able to upgrade from the 250meg plan to the unlimited plan. So, I suggest that if anyone who has an iPad and thinks they will want the unlimited plan, just go ahead and get it now... AT&T has said they will not force anyone over to the new plans, so go ahead, get it while you still can.

  56. Slashdot's ongoing break from reality by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, they are producing two new dataplans that are cheaper then the current that they say cover 98% of their use base. To me, I think this means I'm going to at least save $5 a month here. Also, tethering is FINALLY announced! I'm excited with this news!

    This is like the culmination of everything bad about Slashdot, distilled down to the essence of why the general posting population have got the tech market so wrong for about a decade now.

    It's yet another "No wireless. Less space than a nomad moment" except that instead of involving the most basic of deductive reasoning to see why a product might be popular and avoid embarrassingly bad prognostication, here as you say a product is suddenly cheaper for 95% of tens of millions of iPhone users, and on top of that you FINALLY have the ability to tether which people have been (rightfully) bitching about for ages. And instead of saying "finally AT&T lowers prices a bit" you get a flood of whining because you cannot have enough bandwidth to stream a full 1080p HD rip of a movie per day on your PHONE!

    I mean, the fact the price is lower is right there. It doesn't take The Great Randi to think that tens of millions of people not using more than 500k/month outside WiFi coverage might just enjoy a cheaper plan, or that it might actually DRIVE sales to have a cheaper plan.

    If you want high hilarity, apply the fortune cookie trick to the many insane posts on this story - simply add "Cheaper data plan..." in front of every complaint. Some examples from current top rated posts:

    Cheaper data plan... will put a crimp in whether to purchase that snazzy new iPhone!

    Cheaper data plan means... you are unhappy!

    Cheaper data plan... still sucks though, and still has that unsavory characteristic of a bait-and-switch.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  57. Steve's WWDC Speech by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2

    When in the course of phone maker events it becomes necessary for one to dissolve the carrier lockin which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal availability to which T-Mobile, Verizon and Sprint entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of users requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to that separation.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all phone users are created equal, that they are endowed by Apple with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are bandwidth, throughput and not the pursuit of coverage. -- That to secure these rights, contracts are instituted amongst Apple, deriving their powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of contract becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Contract, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Cellphone Contracts long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Contract, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

      Such has been the patient sufferance of Apple and iPhone users; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Carrier availability. The history of the present AT&T is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these users. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

  58. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by rickb928 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, this is the problem, isn't it? Who wants to sell fat, dumb pipes?

    The cable cos figured this out fairly quickly. First, CATV was a way to deliver better reception; a fat, dumb pipe. Then cable got alternative programming, then exclusive or premium programming, then pay-per-view. Video is pretty much tapped out since Interactive TV failed, and along comes the Internet. A way to sell the same pipe again. Yes, it needed bigger pipes, but that's offset by the revenue. VOIP gave them a third way to sell the same pipe yet again. Not a bad trick.

    Now wireless cos are working out how to do the same thing. Voice is obvious. SMS/MMS is just the second way to sell what is the same pipe in the way the cable cos sell video and Internet. Now wireless is selling Internet as the third stream.

    Well, despite the bigness and fatness of the pipes, there are actual limits. Charging more for volume is the model followed in video, with the cable cos charging us incrementally even for chanels that PAY THEM to be carried. Needless to say, channels that charge the cable cos end up costing us. And cable cos do have limited bandwidth. Most systems carry video, VOIP, residential Internet, commercial Internet, and some carry dedicated data channels not so easily categorized. Wireless is currently even more constrained, but while technology may yet give us way more capability in wireless, it will still be finite.

    And of course wireless cos will want to extract revenue from us, as much and as often as possible.

    I'm not the least surprised AT&T kills the unlimited data plan. They can't tolerate iPhone traffic in many areas, and the iPad soaks up data in a way that makes the iPhone look like it's using an eyedropper. Come on. Be honest. This was inevitable.

    What's interesting is trying to understand who's wagging the dog. Is Apple engorging AT&T by selling data-hungry devices that fatten AT&T's wallet, or is AT&T enabling Apple to sell data-hungry devices that further implant Apple's hold and attraction on and from their customers? The iPod succeeds mostly because of iTunes. iPhone succeeds mostly because of the app store. iPad? Probably because of something Apple is cooking up right now, and we haven't recognized it yet. The iPad is actually breaking Apple's typical strategy, because it is only locked into AT&T by a microSIM, which you can duplicate with a pair of scissors. Something else is coming. Maybe the successful AppleTV? Yes, the iPad screen is not HD ratio, but if you letterbox it up at the top of the screen, what do you do with the bottom of the screen? Answer - monetize it. The Apple Way.

    We'll see. But capped data plans were inevitable.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  59. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Since Verizon and Sprint don't use GSM like the rest of the world, "being locked down to AT&T" in the US means "not making a separate, completely different model from what the rest of the world uses for Verizon and Sprint".

    T-Mobile is a GSM-based carrier in the U.S. that isn't AT&T. Apple's lock-in is more than just a technology issue.

  60. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by Graymalkin · · Score: 2, Informative

    T-Mobile is a GSM carrier but they don't offer 3G service on the same frequency bands as AT&T and in fact a totally different band. In order to support T-Mobile's 3G a phone has to have a baseband radio that supports it. You can't just take a random phone from AT&T and use 3G on T-Mobile's network. Ask anyone with a SIM unlocked iPhone, they're stuck on EDGE with T-Mobile. So in the US you really only have the option of AT&T if you want to put a commonly available baseband in your phone.

    --
    I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
  61. Apple & Google buy carriers? by MikeFM · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder how long until Apple and Google get tired of screwing around with the phone carriers and just buy them out? Apple's market cap is higher than AT&T's and way higher than any of the other mobile carriers. Google already is experimenting with their own networks. They should form a joint venture to buy out and unify mobile carriers so they can package service with their devices. Trying to sell the actual data service is a dying business anyway but if it sells devices and other services it could be a worthwhile purchase. Sell off the parts they don't want and inside of a couple years they could be a serious player. AT&T would be plausible but a big fish but Verizon, T-Mobile, or Sprint would all be pretty easy.

    The real market, besides the devices themselves, is the services related to the devices. It's only a matter of time before cloud storage, on-demand extra processing power, app sells, and even ads are all major sources of income for these mobile devices so throwing in cheap data plans is just a way to get people spending on the other goodies.

    Anyone that thinks Apple or Google aren't pushing for cheaper data plans is just blind. Why do you think Apple was selling the $30/mo unlimited no contract data plan so much? I bet Jobs is pissed at AT&T.

    --
    At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
    1. Re:Apple & Google buy carriers? by Barrinmw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think the Justice Department would allow that...at least they shouldn't allow it.

  62. Has anyone actually read these charges? by realisticradical · · Score: 4, Interesting
    AT&T is doing something I've never understood why people let companies get away with. They're charging an extra $20/month for the tethering plan. Tethering is something that the iPhone does by itself it doesn't require any expense at all for AT&T. I could understand their tactic if they were still offering unlimited data plans because you would expect someone who uses their cell phone as a modem for their computer to use a lot more data. That's not what they're doing though, they're selling 2gb of data for $25/month. What's AT&T's excuse exactly? That for tethering users they're worried that people will actually use the data that they're paying for?

    This is one of the reasons companies like to offer "unlimited" one-size-fits-all plans. The plan is unlimited but really it's more like 5gb, and almost nobody actually uses that much, and it's not ok to tether because then you'll be using more than they planned for, and nobody complains because you think of it as a plan that's "unlimited" but only up to the point that a cell phone would be expected to use. (Essentially Comcast and their ilk do the same, my "home" internet is "unlimited" but not exactly and only in the amount and reliability that a home user would expect, and in some ways that's ok.) But when these companies decide to change the plan to "you get 2gb/month" then I damn well expect that my 2gb should be given to me in whatever way I want it.

    There's another little thing in this press release that I'm a fan of. For the 200mb plan (really, 200mb, really?): "If customers exceed 200 MB in a monthly billing cycle, they will receive an additional 200 MB of data usage for $15 for use in the cycle." And for the 2gb plan, "Should a customer exceed 2 GB during a billing cycle, they will receive an additional 1 GB of data for $10 for use in the cycle." Hooray everybody, it's the old Blockbuster late fee model! Use 2.001gb of data in a month pay for 4! Hooray!

  63. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by ink · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's not all that difficult to free your iPhone. Mine can not only tether, but it also will create an 802.11 access point to share my 3G connection with anyone in range. I also get the added benefit of apt, including pretty much any command-line based utility (ssh, tcpdump, nmap, etc.). I showed my father the roaming 3G access point, and now his phone is jailbroken as well. He did it himself.

    --
    The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.
  64. Re:Did you forget entirely about WiFi? by MadUndergrad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These days you just can't count on wifi to be open. I don't care if a nearby home or hotel has wifi if it's encrypted. These days it seems you have to be inside an establishment that offers wifi to have access to it - that leaves about 99% of the city where I'm stuck with cell coverage.

  65. $20 for tethering? by zxcvbnmasdfghjkl · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think that the additional $20/month for tethering is ridiculous. You're paying a monthly fee to keep a function of the device unlocked. Whether I use 2GB/month on the phone itself or I use 2GB/month while using my phone as a router, isn't it all the same to AT&T? So, why the extra $20 for no extra cost to the provider?

  66. Has to be said ... by cyberElvis · · Score: 2, Funny

    I for one welcome our new byte counting overlords!

    --
    My boy, my boy!
  67. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by CAIMLAS · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The free market is as much an idealized unattainable as the Star Trek no money communism utopia.

    Oh yeah?

    Success stories like Cogent Communications disagree. They went from literally nothing to a highly valuable multinational corporation in a scant few years. How? Leveraging market economics, innovative ideas, and contempt for contemporary approaches, they turned comms upside down (and pissed off the big dogs in the process).

    If I recall correctly, Schaeffer started Cogent in Omaha, NE due to regional economic benefits, and he has a history of commercial property rentals and a degree in physics. So he came at Cogent out of far left field, but made a very solid go at it using "free market principles".

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  68. Relevant quote by Solandri · · Score: 2, Funny

    AT&T: I have altered the deal. Pray I do not alter it any further.

  69. Re:Apple versus Microsoft by StikyPad · · Score: 2, Informative

    Most US warships have vending machines and stores that sell anything from snacks to clothing to DVD players (depending on the size of the ship and its store), so yes, money is still used.

    --
    https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
  70. The real plan by joeyjoejo1200 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    noobs, It's obvious what is being done here: 1- Make the deal cheaper for the 98% that don't consume massive amounts of data 2- Tighten the screws on the people hammering their network (the 2% using more than 2 Gig per month) This makes it better for all (just not me), its a culling of the outliers