Microsoft Explains Windows Phone 7 'Phantom Data'

Fuzzy Eric writes "Microsoft has confirmed that some handsets running its Windows Phone 7 software are sending and receiving 'phantom data.' The problem surfaced in early January with some owners of phones running Windows Phone 7, claiming that their phone was sending 'between 30 and 50MB of data' every day; an amount that would eat into a 1GB allowance in 20 days. Microsoft said its investigation found that most problems were caused by a unnamed 'third party' service. It said that the problem seemed to only affect 'a small (low single-digit) percentage of Windows Phone customers.'"

Comments

NSA

[qbast]

No wonder that this third-party service remains unnamed. After all NSA stands for 'no such agency'.

Re:NSA

[Anonymous Coward]

No wonder that this third-party service remains unnamed. After all NSA stands for 'no such agency'.

Ahem: "No Such Application"

Re:NSA

[Anonymous Coward]

What a piece of crap. Or do you think the NSA is incapable of making sure any covert channels aren't accounted for when calculating traffic?

No, this is either MS trying to shift the blame away from them, or just trying to avoid litigation or offending some partner.

Re:NSA

[Qzukk]

Somebody's gotta pay for that data, and if the government wont...

Re:NSA

[AHuxley]

Yes the NSA is your telco network, so its free ride for them.
The FBI would just outsource to its wiretap/phone billing software contractors.
Was it like George Koronias of Vodaphone in Greece or Adamo Bove, head of security at Telecom Italia?
Or did MS just 'google' and test to see if 3rd party marketing could get away with a nice daily ad database update?
A security hardware/software backdoor, marketing or just MS been MS and alpha testing on your mobile plan?

Re:NSA

[Mister Whirly]

OR, an even more obvious answer, it could be a third-party service that is only affecting a very low percentage of phone users. Just because it is a MS phone doesn't instantly mean it is time to don the tinfoil hats. MS is into making money, not "destroying people's lives through software" as the groupthink at Slashdot sometimes assumes. (Unless there is serious profit in destroying lives, but so far that isn't the case.)

Re:NSA

[somersault]

Unless there is serious profit in destroying lives, but so far that isn't the case

That depends. There is profit to be had from hyping up a piece of shit software, let's call it Windies MEVisto, have everyone buy it and complain that it's destroying their lives. Because then you can bringing out a new and similar version later called Windies XP7SE "Doesn't Destroy Your Life So Much" Edition to get people to pay yet again.

Re:NSA

[JWSmythe]

No, it's actually the O2STK.

    Sorry, we just got done watching all the "Middleman" episodes. :)

Re:NSA

[davester666]

And they are devious fuckers.

Don't tell anybody I told you, but they are the REAL owners of Facebook.

They got the brilliant idea that getting you to enter and update your personal information into their database is WAY easier than for them to keep it up to date. And all your 'friend' data and entries on where you go and what you do are a huge bonus.

Re:NSA

[sexconker]

Unless there is serious profit in destroying lives, but so far that isn't the case

That depends. There is profit to be had from hyping up a piece of shit software, let's call it Windies MEVisto, have everyone buy it and complain that it's destroying their lives. Because then you can bringing out a new and similar version later called Windies XP7SE "Doesn't Destroy Your Life So Much" Edition to get people to pay yet again.

The problem with your post is, well, everything.
ME and XP were vastly different. ME was shit. XP was fine.
Vista and 7 are nearly identical. Vista is fine. 7 is fine. 90% of he "problems" with Vista were due to 3rd-party drivers, and the issues were fixed relatively quickly. SP1 also fixed a few issues that were MS's fault (as opposed to the driver issues that weren't MS's fault in any way shape or form). In the end, Vista became the black sheep mostly due to perception. The end result was Windows 7 being rushed, and features being dropped (WinFS, anyone?).

Re:NSA

[webdog314]

Nobody Saw Anything

Re:NSA

[Jesus_666]

Hey, they've been dropping WinFS since what, Windows 98? It had a different name but the promised featureset was similar. And let's not forget that WinFS was also promised for Vista back when it was still called Longhorn. I seriously doubt that Windows 8 will have it. Or Windows 9.

Vista was mainly hurt by a disastrous launch. The driver issues were one problem, "Vista Capable" was another and the fact that nobody had yet figured out which parts of their applications weren't compatible between XP and Vista was a third. Plus, of course, everyone expected it to feel like five years of polish while Microsoft had restarted the whole thing from scratch halfway through. By the time SP1 rolled around Vista had a horrible reputation it could never live down.

Re:NSA

[Anonymous Coward]

You and sexconker have it spot on. And I usually think of sexconker as a huge troll (which he usually is).

Anyway, you're both absolutely right about Vista. I laugh at all the people I hear say "Uhhhhh Vista. I wouldn't want THAT. But I tried Windows 7 and I loved it!" (I bet they never tried Vista)

Hell, on my local radio station, the DJs were actually complaining one day around Windows 7 launch time about MS not offering an upgrade from XP to 7 and how that was sooo horrible, what will everyone do. Well, bad rep or not, there was a whole other version in between there... which did have an upgrade... (and yeah, the DJs did still have a bit of a point considering the number of XP users vs. Vista users at the time).

I used Vista for a while before 7 came out. I had a few issues before SP1, but afterwards it was solid and I don't regret using it. 7 further improves upon it with more UI enhancements, better task bar and other things, but it's still pretty much Vista.

Re:NSA

[somersault]

I do pretty much think of Vista and 7 as the same thing, and I think the change in perception between the versions is quite funny. I was just making a joke *shrug* Some people even here have said that 7 is actually a lot more pleasant to use though through toned down UAC, and I don't think they had the nice shiny dock in Vista (though for that to be a reason for an OS to be called better is pretty silly - you could load a fancy dock onto any OS..)

Re:NSA

[msauve]

What "change in perception?" I'd take XP over either one of them. For the most part, XP works fine. Win7 always acts like my grandmother, assuming it knows best, and telling me what to do...but while my grandmother would get a clue after a few "thanks, but no thanks," Win7 persists and there's no obvious way to make it stop. I could change to something else, but that would be like killing grandma.

Re:NSA

[RobertM1968]

What I find more funny is that numerous articles on WP7 all seem to have to have this in it (in some form or another):

Windows Phone 7 was launched in October 2010 to acclaim by manufacturers and users.

It is considered the company's first credible challenge to rival operating systems from Apple, Google, Research in Motion and Nokia.

I wonder how much that costs Microsoft to ensure articles end like that?

Take a look at this.

Re:NSA

[indi0144]

You know, this makes sense since I recall watching a documentary in the early 2000's about how American Inteligence Agencies were working in creating a "network"of interconnected peers, they got the info from phone usage and emails and they were creating graphical representations of such network, you clicked over some name and it displayed all communications to and from his monitored media. Some time later, after the first boom of Facebook (when no .edu email was needed) I told myself, "well this is actually like that thing these guy were doing"

Now that you point that out, it's obviously easier to give some candy to the people so they can freely hand out their data. I don't use FB to store personal information, not under my real name that is*, but FB it's a great tool for marketing and self promotion when used wisely. So for me is neither good or bad.

--
* maybe in the our brave new future being a loner would make you a criminal

The man: Hey you! stop slacking society *bayonet bump* go back to the line and get along, or else

MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[blunte]

1. No Answer

or

2. We found the problem. It wasn't our fault, and it doesn't matter because it's not happening to anyone. (lie)

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Anonymous Coward]

1. No Answer

or

2. We found the problem. It wasn't our fault, and it doesn't matter because it's not happening to anyone. (lie)

I can believe it's not happening to anyone - has anyone got one??

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Anonymous Coward]

1. No Answer

or

2. We found the problem. It wasn't our fault, and it doesn't matter because it's not happening to anyone. (lie)

I can believe it's not happening to anyone - has anyone got one??

This is Slashdot. If they do have one, they won't admit it out of shame.

Poster: "I'm a drug addled pervert."

Slashdot: "Whatever"

Poster: "I love Windows 7 and Microsoft products!"

Slashdot: "You sick fuck! How could you be so STUPID! Get the fuck outta here you godforsaken creep!"

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Gadget_Guy]

We found the problem. It wasn't our fault, and it doesn't matter because it's not happening to anyone. (lie)

Until Microsoft say which service causes this (so it can be independently verified by users) then you just have to assume that it is a lie. Normally I like to give the benefit of the doubt (and it does seem feasible that a 3rd party app is responsible, but like you said, this follows the standard style of PR spin that most companies employ.

This would not be a problem if the mobile OS actually valued the customer over the developers and phone companies. My last Symbian phone prompted the user to give permission to any app that wanted to access the Internet. No spyware under the guise of a game here, no 3rd party services chewing up quota, no apps being just thin layers over websites.

I hate seeing that circle animation that says data access is happening on my iPhone for something that shouldn't need it. Even worse, I hate the fact that on the iPhone the developer can turn off that display so you don't know if any connection has occured. Evil. I presume that the Windows Phone does the same thing.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[MikeDirnt69]

+1 Awful Truth

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny, when stuff like this happens to Apple, why does everyone give them the benefit of the doubt, but when it is Microsoft it is "EVIL" instantly?

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Neil Boekend]

Nope. I have never given Apple the benefit of the doubt. So at the least "Everyone" is an overstatement.
"Most people" may also be an overstatement.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[supernes]

... I hate the fact that on the iPhone the developer can turn off that display so you don't know if any connection has occured.

Just a quick note - that network activity spinner you talk about doesn't show up by default, it's entirely up to the developer whether he chooses to notify the users that data is being transmitted over the network (even when that's actually not true). So I guess you shouldn't be mad at evil develoeprs that turn it off, but instead should thank the benevolent ones that turn it on as appropriate.

And while we're on the subject, iOS' neutered multitasking makes it much harder for this type of quota-eating background transfer to even occur in the first place. Guess it's not all bad...

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[rjstanford]

Probably because, while they're far from perfect, more of Apple's mistakes have been both relatively harmless and also overblown by the media ( they mysterious "death grip" is a good example). Alternatively, many of Microsoft's mistakes have been glossed over my the media and have actually been quite annoying.

In this case, there seems to be no good reason why Microsoft couldn't have revealed exactly what was going on. If its a telco app, then just say "We can't reveal any more details due to our non-disclosure with Verizon" or whatever it is.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Anonymous Coward]

wah wah

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[geekoid]

NO, you don't assum it's a lie. You just know it's an unknown.

That is all. Maybe it's truth, maybe it's a lie, maybe it's a little from column A and a little from column B.

Assuming everything a corporation says is a lie is just as bad as assuming everything a corporation says is the truth.

Both lead to bad decisions, bad thinking and views that can be manipulated.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[CannonballHead]

I hate seeing that circle animation

Clearly you're looking at it wrong. Try flipping the phone over, that should fix the problem of seeing the circle animation.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[hey]

Saying they found the app thats doing it but not naming it doesn't say anything. We all knew it was some process or another.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[JWSmythe]

You could change the first line to "pill popping, crack smoking, heroin shooting pedophile, with his sister / sex slave locked in the basement" and you'd still get the same response.

    Well, he may get other responses like "Is she hot?", and "Pictures or it never happened.". :)

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Gadget_Guy]

Funny, when stuff like this happens to Apple, why does everyone give them the benefit of the doubt, but when it is Microsoft it is "EVIL" instantly?

I think that it is funny that you would claim this in response to me calling Apple evil (or at least I labelled their practice of allowing everyone to screw with the user to be evil).

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Gadget_Guy]

Assuming everything a corporation says is a lie is just as bad as assuming everything a corporation says is the truth.

I agree, but then I didn't assume that everything this corporation said was a lie. I said that this followed the pattern used as standard PR spin by deflecting blame without specifying details to allow the public to check it for themselves (or to uninstall the software). I did say that the story was plausible and that I would normally give them the benefit of the doubt, which shows that I don't consider everything MS says to be a lie.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[sexconker]

Apple's mistakes have been both relatively harmless and also overblown by the media ( they mysterious "death grip" is a good example

A fundamental and obvious design flaw that ignores basic engineering principles, that ignores the laws of physics, that was adopted purely in order to advance the aesthetic of a device, that went unnoticed during testing because real-world testing simply didn't occur, that results in catastrophic signal loss to the point of dropping calls / being unable to place calls, ON A PHONE, that to this day is still unaddressed beyond a rubber band workaround, that to this day is still unacknowledged by the company that made the device beyond "It's not true, but we'll give you free rubber bands to shut you up.", is by no measure "harmless".

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[AK Marc]

Assuming everything a corporation says is a lie is just as bad as assuming everything a corporation says is the truth.

It may be "just as bad" but will land you in the "most likely correct" category, rather than the "most likely wrong" category.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[rgviza]

Apple has an exhaustive test suite they run on all programs before admitting them to the app store to make sure this doesn't happen. The closed ecosystem ensures perfect security and ensures that the apps don't eat your bandwidth cap, therefore this could never happen on the iPhone. /sarcasm off

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[HiThere]

While I'll acknowledge that what you say is true WRT harmless, they *thought* they did real world testing. They went out in the parking lot. But to keep it secret they didn't go far. And they were right next to a cell phone tower. Oops!

Still, they should fix the problem and acknowledge their error. But this is much different from evil. They definitely didn't intend to create the problem. (If they're still selling that model, then *THAT* would count as evil.)

Making a mistake and then refusing to fix it because it would be expensive and embarrassing isn't evil. It also sure isn't good. In fact it's closer to evil than to good. But if the motivations for the original actions weren't evil, then the actions weren't evil. Evil required malicious intent. This has frequently been demonstrated WRT MS, but *very* rarely WRT Apple. And then not directed at their customers, but rather at their competitors or their developers.

So the end users tend to defend Apple. Everybody makes mistakes. It's no surprise that Apple should. It is, of course, troubling that they refuse to admit them, but everyone also knows that it feels troubling to admit to a mistake, especially in an area where one is supposed to be an expert. And extra especially if it's an expensive mistake. (Again, this sure isn't good, but it's also not evil.)

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Jesus_666]

No, with Microsoft it's "INCOMPETENT". I won't assume that Microsoft built a mobile OS that secretly and constantly siphons data off your smartphone. I do, however, find it credible that Microsoft built a mobile OS without considering that not everyone has an unlimited data plan.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Patman64]

Poster: "I love OS X and Apple products!"

Slashdot: "You sick fuck! How could you be so STUPID! Get the fuck outta here you godforsaken creep!"

Fixed it for you.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[anyGould]

And re-reading TFA, there's no mention that they're planning to do anything about it. And since they won't tell us what program it is, WP7 owners are fairly SOL at this point.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Disk Pickable]

Don't forget the old Microsoft Knowledge Base classic, "This behavior is by design."

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Anonymous Coward]

3. We found the problem. It only seems to be affecting people with arabic sounding names. Please change your names..

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[exomondo]

I can believe it's not happening to anyone - has anyone got one??

I've been through all the smartphone platforms - except Android (only on a tablet) - and i'm currently trying a WP7 phone, I've even got 'feedback' switched on and don't have this issue. It seems to be a U.S. carrier issue, possibly even AT&T only.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[exomondo]

Until Microsoft say which service causes this (so it can be independently verified by users) then you just have to assume that it is a lie. Normally I like to give the benefit of the doubt (and it does seem feasible that a 3rd party app is responsible, but like you said, this follows the standard style of PR spin that most companies employ.

Given this problem is far from widespread or common i would certainly say it's a 3rd party issue, and based on the very few and far between reports of this issue it would seem it's possibly a particular service on a particular carrier.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[sincewhen]

Do you man a call centre help desk for Microsoft by any chance?

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[vegiVamp]

Years of experience.

That being said, though, Apple is on a different path with a similar destination, though.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Anonymous Coward]

Aaarg! Please close parenthesis, I shall now feel open all day...

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Gadget_Guy]

)

Sorry about that! I hope that I didn't cause any offense. I promise that in the future I won't leave you feeling, as you say, "open all day.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Coren22]

As far as I know, they are still selling that model, and it still has the issue. They just most likely give you a rubber bumper with the phone now.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[HiThere]

Well, if that fixes the problem, then I don't see anything wrong with that. If the problem is a capacitive linkage, then it might well fix the problem.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[Coren22]

It doesn't fix the issue. The issue is very poor antenna design which has not been fixed. They used a work around, kind of like when you tie up your bumper with some wire to keep it from falling off, you should still get it fixed.

Re:MS Fault Playbook: Two Answers

[rjstanford]

Not only that, but its been shown that millions upon millions of people do have the unchanged, original-design iPhone 4, and don't have the problems you're talking about. That's exactly what I mean when I said "overblown." Most if not all people complaining about the problem do not have (and would never purchase) an iPhone.

If millions of people were really in a situation where holding their only celphone in a normal way caused the call to drop, do you really think they'd all go, "Oh, well, it's an Apple so it must be perfect."? Of course not. The media was looking for weaknesses, thought they'd found one, didn't, and it all blew over.

Except on sites like /. when people want to be all l33t and complainy.

"Unnamed third party service" being

[unity100]

cia or nsa ?

Re:"Unnamed third party service" being

[RMH101]

I will put money on it not being anything like that interesting.
It'll probably turn out to be either a crucial app vendor or a launch partner that they don't want to annoy - e.g. if it turned out that one of the HTC apps or the Facebook app was doing it. Until they know for sure, and work out how to fix it they probably want to be a little coy about what's causing it.
Anyway, it's not affecting that many users as far as I can tell. I've got an HTC Mozart for work that's not doing it, after checking my data usage.

Re:"Unnamed third party service" being

[Penguinisto]

Either way, how come it doesn't ask for permission to transmit (and detail what gets transmitted), like most modern smartphones require? You know, that privacy thing everyone keeps harping on?

That alone would (well, should) make people leery before buying one.

Re:"Unnamed third party service" being

[Hylandr]

These are not the data bits you're looking for...

- Dan.

Re:"Unnamed third party service" being

[JWSmythe]

    I've seen plenty of this in the past.

    Test an app in a nice safe place (in-house, phone simulator, or whatever). Works great. Then it goes to production, and you find out that it does pesky things like take up too much bandwidth.

    I've seen projects that worked great in-house, between the developers machines and the in-house testing servers. In production though, where the servers aren't in the next room, and the customer doesn't have a 100Mb/s line on a switched network, things just don't work the same way.

    From seeing several botched smartphone implementations lately, it looks like little to no field testing is done any more. I'm surprised that they don't make a few hundred prototypes, and hand them out throughout the company, saying "use this instead of your own cell phone". It seems "field" testing is done in a lab. Then it's up to us consumers to find out that they work great as long as you're within a few feet of the tower, and have unlimited data plans.

    I found my Blackberry (8330) worked great, except at one place I was working. Normally in the city, the phone always just worked, and the battery would last for days. Then I was working in the middle of BFE, where coverage was spotty at best. To talk on the phone, or even get text messages, I had to stand in one part of the parking lot. Since most of the drive, and anywhere in the building didn't have coverage, the battery would die about 6 hours into the day, with no phone calls or texts. I stopped working there, and voila, the battery was back to surviving for days at a time.

    For those who don't know, cell phones generally turn up their transmit power, until they can reach a tower. Then they'll bring the transmit power back down to what is necessary. This normally saves your battery life, while ensuring coverage. If there's no coverage to be found, it wastes the battery life with the transmitter at max power until service can be found.

Re:"Unnamed third party service" being

[R3d M3rcury]

how come it doesn't ask for permission to transmit (and detail what gets transmitted), like most modern smartphones require?

Maybe I'm not up on my modern smartphones, but that sounds like an annoying option that most people would turn off.

Which modern smartphone does that, just out of curiousity?

Re:"Unnamed third party service" being

[Anonymous Coward]

Its probably some excitable juvenile cracking all the camera live streaming he can get his hand around from as many cheerleaders he can find?? That's interesting, no?

Re:"Unnamed third party service" being

[plopez]

Testing has always been seen as too expensive. Do a quick QA at the end and call it good. Part of the problem is embedded in the word "production". Software is not an industrial process making refrigerators or cars. It is a living breating thing which must adapt to a complex environment. OK, I should stop now before I begin ranting about lack of QA and incorrect software management practices.

Re:"Unnamed third party service" being

[cynyr]

My rooted my touch 4g, running droidwall in white list mode also makes this basically non existent. Anything not approved gets no network access,i can also choose to limit just 3g, just wifi or both.

Re:"Unnamed third party service" being

[JWSmythe]

    For a second there, I thought you were serious. :) Then my sarcasm alert start ringing the "Deep Sarcasm" tone. I'd describe it, but it's in my head. Shhhh, don't mess with my insanities. :)

Who gets the 1GB plan?

[orphiuchus]

I'm not saying the phantom data isn't bad, I think every kind of phantom is bad, but who on earth gets a smart-phone and signs up for the 1GB a month plan? Do they even have those?

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[jfbilodeau]

I have a 500MB plan, and it works for me. I'm cheap. Of course, I don't have a Windows phone.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[orphiuchus]

Damn... I would ask you to take a picture and send it to me for proof, but I don't want you to go over your limit.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[Spad]

I'm on a 1Gb/month plan (Nexus One), but between Wi-Fi and not streaming video 24/7 I've only pulled 2.5Gb of Cell data in the last 9 months.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[tripy]

Well, in my country, 1Gb is almost the biggest dataplan any phone company offers, and it costs me 45$ per month . I could have an "unlimited" data plan for 150$ per month, but this price is simply outrageous. And no, I don't live in the tird world, in central Europe actually. Switzerland, where not everyone is a rich banker that promote tax evasion...

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[jfbilodeau]

I would be happy to show you, but my account cuts me off automatically when I hit my download li---

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[beelsebob]

That would be the majority of users, because they're in wifi range 99% of the time, and actually only need 3G for the random snippits of data at random times.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[orphiuchus]

Actually, in my experience cell phones are much cheaper in the 3rd world. For 30 bucks in most of Africa you can get a cell phone and more minutes than you could ever use. I'm not sure about smart-phones over there, but the basic cell phone service is astoundingly cheap.

We in the "1st" world are being cheated by carriers.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[Sechr Nibw]

There have been a few times that I have considered switching my iPhone to the 200 MB/month plan, honestly. Since getting my iPhone in Sept 09, I haven't used more than 140 MB in a single month. Mostly because where I live and work and play are all saturated with WiFi, and there isn't 3G where I live, just where I work. But, as I got in on the unlimited data plan before they removed that, I've been hesitant to abandon that gravy boat, in case 3G becomes more readily available, or I find an app I can't live without. (Also, it becomes less important to switch as I get closer and closer to switching to Verizon.)

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[AHuxley]

http://www.telstra.com.au/mobile/plans/nextg-cap-plans.cfm
Note the fun "25c per MB" part when your (or your "smart" phone) is done with the 1 or 2 GB per month.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[RMH101]

1GB is considered a lot by most phone companies on a cellular plan. Most of UK networks are downgrading their "unlimited" to mean "500MB/month" right now - see the recent furore about t-mobile.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[bluefoxlucid]

It costs me $30/mo for unlimited data.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[MobyTurbo]

In Great Britain, T-Mobile has only a 500MB data plan for new customers (originally *all* customers, but the backlash was too great). They have an ad campaign now saying "don't view video or download files, save that for your computer at home".

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[orphiuchus]

I'm not saying the phantom data isn't bad, I think every kind of phantom is bad, but who on earth gets a smart-phone and signs up for the 1GB a month plan? Do they even have those?

Ok, based on responses to this I guess I'll make a different point: Apparently I'm the only one who uses tethering while traveling.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[Anonymous Coward]

In my country unlimited plans aren't an option, at least I didn't find any when doing my research, but there are data packages one can sign up for to not have to pay the overly expensive price per MB they're offering before exceeding the limit. In the end I didn't see the point of paying $35 a month and having to switch service provider for a 500 MB one, and went with 50 MB a month for $7 instead, on the low-end of the scale. It served me well with lots of daily mail usage, occasional web browsing while commuting, and occasionally for ssh on my netbook via tethered WLAN on the train.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[jo_ham]

I have a friend who is on the lowest level plan that AT&T offers for the iPhone, and was able to afford one when the plans switched from unlimited only to a tiered system. She really doesn't need unlimited data, since the bulk of her data use is done via wifi with 3G/Edge for those handy times when she needs it. I say "can now afford" not in that "children going hungry" sense, but that her budget was reasonable for a new phone, but with her usage patterns the cost of an unlimited/huge plan would have been a waste.

Not every customer needs an unlimited/giant plan.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[Kokuyo]

We're just used to that old and lame excuse that 'Everything is more expensive in Switzerland *shrug*'... But frankly, that 1 GB limit is plain stupid. Especially when you consider that these plans aren't even primarily targeted at mobile devices like phones but mobile devices like laptops and netbooks and there, one GB is just a lame joke.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[L4t3r4lu5]

I'd reply, but he won't be able to read it until next month.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[L4t3r4lu5]

I'm not saying the phantom data isn't bad, I think every kind of phantom is bad

The Ghost who Walks would be extremely unhappy to hear you say this.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[piripiri]

Well for 30 bucks in Africa you can feed for one month.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not saying the phantom data isn't bad, I think every kind of phantom is bad, but who on earth gets a smart-phone and signs up for the 1GB a month plan? Do they even have those?

Blackberries often have such a plan. With a blackberry enterprise server, data to/from the blackberry is not only encrypted, it's optimized and compressed.

One of the things RIM realized a long time ago is that on a small screen, a lot of website or email info isn't going to be displayed/rendered properly. So why transmit all the html fluff when it isn't going to be used?

So when an email comes in to a blackberry enterprise server, most of the html fluff is stripped out, then it is compressed with a conventional compression algorithm, then it is encrypted with AES, then it is pushed to the handheld.

The combination of all this is blackberries are very data efficient. If you ever have to roam internationally at usurious rates, or you live in a country with ridiculous data prices, you will appreciate what blackberry has to offer.

By comparison, no other platform has push email, so other smartphones have to poll continuously for email, which drives up the data bill even if you don't send/receive a single email. Exchange activesync comes closer to push email, but it isn't.

The end result is that most of my company's blackberries rarely go over 25 megabytes for email. Other activity (music streaming, web browsing, youtube, various apps) is where the big data usage is.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[guruevi]

When you're with AT&T you have the choice between 300MB and 1GB. A lot of providers won't allow you to eat up more than 2GB before hitting some type of FUP.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[L4t3r4lu5]

Yes you are, as there are far more economically viable data contracts utilising 3G data dongles. If you have your laptop with you anyway, why are you using a phone for data? Don't give me "It's one less thing to carry"; If you are using a device which requires tethering for data, it almost certainly has a USB port.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[orphiuchus]

Yes you are, as there are far more economically viable data contracts utilising 3G data dongles. If you have your laptop with you anyway, why are you using a phone for data? Don't give me "It's one less thing to carry"; If you are using a device which requires tethering for data, it almost certainly has a USB port.

Because I have a phone that does tethering with unlimited data already, and over the last month I drove all around Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and Arizona, and out in those big western states there is a lot of land where the only available internet is 3G(which, surprisingly, is almost everywhere out there).

The performance is fine for what I'm doing, I already have the contract, I already have the phone, its easy, and what more reason do you need?

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[orphiuchus]

I'm not saying the phantom data isn't bad, I think every kind of phantom is bad

The Ghost who Walks would be extremely unhappy to hear you say this.

I can't believe this is the first post to get my main point.

And the Ghost who walks should go back to where he came from and stop taking our jobs and our women! Damn clear-skins.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[Andy Dodd]

2GB is now the standard (and I think LARGEST) plan you can get on AT&T.

1GB seems odd - think AT&T's were 250M and 2GB last I checked.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[Rary]

I'm not saying the phantom data isn't bad, I think every kind of phantom is bad, but who on earth gets a smart-phone and signs up for the 1GB a month plan? Do they even have those?

Ok, based on responses to this I guess I'll make a different point: Apparently I'm the only one who uses tethering while traveling.

Tethering would make quite a difference, I imagine. As someone who hasn't traveled since I got my smartphone, I have no experience with it.

Mainly, I use my phone with wi-fi whenever possible, and consequently my 100MB data add-on is more than enough for me.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[PhxBlue]

Damn... I would ask you to take a picture and send it to me for proof, but I don't want you to go over your limit.

Too late. Today's the 20th.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[RulerOf]

Not every customer needs an unlimited/giant plan.

That's very true, but the way the tiers work is really designed to screw the customer anyway. If they didn't want to do that, they'd bill you based on which tier your usage patterns fit into, rather than you adjusting your usage patterns to fit a specific tier.

I'm happily on AT&T's unlimited plan, and it works well for me: I've got some months where I pull 1 gig, and one where I've pulled as high as 6. Granted, it's mostly from video.

The real problem with the cost of a smartphone is that the baseline price for it is the same as for a dumb phone or a feature phone. With smartphones and their "required" data plans being the only offerings available with the features that the customers want these days---I can't tell you the number of people I know who couldn't care less that their Blackberry is uber-secure or receives emails for them; they bought the phone because it's great for texting (*cha-ching* goes the Verizon cash register)---people often find that getting what they want out of their next phone yields a mandatory upgrade in their monthly bill as well.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[muyla]

I live in Brazil, and we pay here about $20 for unlimited data in a prepaid phone

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[imakemusic]

I'm on an "unlimited" 500MB deal with Orange. I've yet to reach my limit because there is usually a wifi connection around.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[mseidl]

I live in Germany and pay 10€ a month for unlimited data.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[digitig]

I think every kind of phantom is bad

You're clearly not an audio technician.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[vbraga]

Which telco?

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[Civil_Disobedient]

Sorry, there just wasn't enough room in the margins.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[CaptSlaq]

Thanks for this. It made me smile.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[overlordofmu]

Smart phone owner here. No data plan, voice only. I have wifi at home and work. The GPS maps for the USA, Canada and Mexico are stored on the phone. Who on earth thinks everyone makes the sames decisions and has the same priorities? Who on earth thinks that some people might not want to follow the herd and strike out on their own instead?

And when I did have the data plan, my usage was approximately 150 MBs a month down and 60 MBs a month up.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[qbast]

Next ads: "don't make calls, save that for your landline"

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[Anonymous Coward]

[...] and not streaming video 24/7 [...]

What? Luddite! As everyone knows, you MUST stream videos* 24/7, 365 days a year, or you are wasting your internets and should give them away to people who WILL use them. NOW. Then you will fully understand why data congestion and caps are illegal and immoral and you'll be able to complain, too! Can't you see how happy you will be then?

*: Videos. Plural. It doesn't matter if you can't physically, mentally, or temporally watch that many videos in your life, you MUST use your entire bandwidth constantly, else someone will steal it from you and you won't be getting every penny of your money's worth for it.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[Cwix]

You could do that here to..

Ramen noodles: 15 cents * 3 a day = 45 cents * 30 days = $13.50

You would prob still be eating better.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[Ambvai]

I have a smartphone without a data plan-- I just use it as an overpowered PDA.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[RobDude]

A lot of it depends on your carrier. Phone companies are well known for being dicks to their customers.

As an example; my girlfriend (on Verizon) wanted to renew her contract and get a new phone. I don't remember the exact model but she had the 'V2' and wanted to get the 'V3'.

Verizon wouldn't give her the V3, unless she purchased a data plan. The V3 was considered a smart phone (but it was crap by smart-phone standards). Even after several phone calls and eventually, cancelling her service; they still refused to let us upgrade to the V3 without modifying her contract to include a data plan. Even though she didn't want to use data.

I'm a cheap bastard, so I told her to cancel, and I moved her onto my Sprint plan. She would have just gotten the smallest data plan and said, 'Oh well, it's only another $8'

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[kevinmenzel]

You can get a blackberry without unlimited texting? That's crazy, I don't even have that option - and at the very least you'd surely get unlimited BBM... And if not, I guess carriers like that might be the reason RIM isn't very focused on the US market these days...

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[thetoadwarrior]

Mine's unlimited and I've gone over 1 gig many times. My co-worker uses his for internet acces for his laptop during his train journey and frequently uses 3+ gig a month. My deal is under £30 (£25 if I recall) a month so it's not even near being one of the more expensive packages.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[RulerOf]

and at the very least you'd surely get unlimited BBM

But you see, that's not a text message.

God forbid you send someone a blackberry message or an email. It might be free that way!

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[AK Marc]

I'm on a 50 MB plan with an iPhone. Not in the US though, where they don't care (or are banned by law) from discriminating from the type of device, and instead just charge for usage. But then the data is used just to check email when out and expecting an important one and for maps. Everything else is done over WiFi. I have never hit the 50 MB cap, but that's still far cheaper than doing a no-plan per-kB default.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[alien9]

I have a 200MB plan and it suffices mostly because wherever I am prone to heavy internet usage I can get wifi.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, having a 500 meg limit is perfectly fine. That's 500 megs of on-the-go usage.

At home, it connects through our wireless router, which uses our regular (unlimited) internet service. Since 90% of the internet browsing on it is at home (or somewhere with free wifi), that leaves those 500 megs to quickly check competing stores prices while in the store or whatnot.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[muyla]

TIM

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[icebraining]

Well, I don't know if my phone counts as "smart", but it can install apps and I don't have a data plan either. I have Wifi both in my house and university, and I bought an SD card with enough space to store anything I need anywhere else.

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[Briareos]

The more I keep reading about phone plans on /. the more I'm convinced Austria is the only country in the world that has sensible mobile plans.

I'm paying 0.04 EUR a minute calling anywhere in Austria, 0.04 EUR per SMS and 4 EUR for each started gigabyte each month, with no base fee and an option to pay 8.80 EUR a month for 1000 minutes of talking and 1000 SMS - if I were to turn my phone off for a month I wouldn't be paying anything...

np: Slowdive - Miranda (Pygmalion (Disc 1))

Re:Who gets the 1GB plan?

[Ambiguous Puzuma]

She was probably referring to the LG enV2 (VX9100) and LG enV3 (VX9200). I use the enV2 with Verizon, and do not have a data plan, but would be required to get a data plan if I got a subsidized enV3 from Verizon. (I believe they don't offer enV2s anymore.)

Good job, Microsoft

[thisnamestoolong]

I had already compiled a fairly extensive list of reasons I would not want a Windows phone, such as the fact that I don't want a phone that blue screens and/or needs to be rebooted twice a day. Now you can add massive spying by an "unnamed third party" (who we swear is not the FBI) into the mix. No thanks.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[orphiuchus]

If it was the FBI or CIA or NSA I would still mind, but it wouldn't be THAT huge a deal, mainly because:

A. They will track me anyway if they have any reason to.

B. They aint got shit on me.

C. The chances of them actually bugging me are about .001%

I'm more worried about it being someone who is going to try to sell me shit. Because the likelihood of them actually bugging me is almost 100%.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

(who we swear is not the FBI)

I suspect that acronym is too long by one letter.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[Z00L00K]

Right - the risk of getting bugged by FBI is usually lower than the risk of getting your identity stolen and abused.

At least that applies to most of us.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[thijsh]

A and B may be true, but C is quite the opposite. You can be 99,999% sure your mobile Internet traffic also gets routed goes trough one of the NarusInsight boxes. These things are produced for mass-surveillance with a reported capacity of 10Gbit of traffic per unit... Since mobile networks can potentially be a goldmine for 'anti-terrorist' monitoring you can be sure they hooked a fiber from each large network node to a room filled with these babies. The problem is that the chance of C is much higher than most people think, the chances of B and A happening are fairly large once you communicate anything remotely interesting to one of the agencies.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

Look, I own a Windows phone (not 7 it's 6.1 then flashed it to 6.5) . I hate Windows for many reasons. I think it's slow (granted, the hardware is not top of the line), it's cumbersome, and there are next to no apps for it.

But the claim that a windows phone has to be rebooted every other day or that one gets BSODs on a windows phone -- that's pure crap. The phone is not rock solid, but it easily runs for months on end with no problem. The few times i've actually had to reboot my windows phone was either because i was flashing an updated ROM or because I was trying to see if the signal issues were caused by the OS (they weren't).

So given that winmo 6.5 is decently stable, why would you FUD about phone 7?

For me the biggest issues with windows mobile 6.5 are: slow startup, slow GUI, poor app market. Each of these is a huge minus for winmo compared to the competition. But I would not complain about the phone's stability.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[CuriousGeorge113]

....such as the fact that I don't want a phone that blue screens and/or needs to be rebooted twice a day.....

Sounds like my co-workers Moto Droid 2.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[orphiuchus]

I may just be too uncool, but I honestly don't do or say anything that would be worth the time of law enforcement.

I'm not saying its ok to just track everything everyone says, that would be a horrible practice, I'm just saying I'm close to the bottom of the list.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

Agree, my Droid needs to be rebooted once at a week at least or it starts to slow to a complete crawl.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[amliebsch]

I think he meant "bugging" in the sense of "annoying," not "wiretapping." His point, I think was that he doesn't really care if the FBI is wiretapping him because they almost certainly will never bother him or waste his time, but advertisers almost certainly will.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[orphiuchus]

I think he meant "bugging" in the sense of "annoying," not "wiretapping." His point, I think was that he doesn't really care if the FBI is wiretapping him because they almost certainly will never bother him or waste his time, but advertisers almost certainly will.

Ahh, I didn't think that wording out. Thank you.

I should add though that I do indeed care, I'm just not panicking about it. If the FBI follows me for a month it will be a unnecessary invasion of my privacy and I will be upset, but I won't be outright panicking is because at the end of that month the FBI will be bored out of their minds and move on to someone worth following.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

he meant "bug" as in "bother, annoy, pester" not "bug" as in "to remotely observe".

the FBI et al will only bother you if they think your worth the trouble (remember actually doing something to you requires them to reveal that they were listening). Advertisers on the other hand have every incentive to try and get your attention.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[Andy Dodd]

I agree here. Early versions of WinCE were awful. Same with trying to actually shove Windows into a phone.

But later revisions of Windows Mobile, along with Windows Phone 7, have no real connection to Windows other than riding the marketing coattails of Windows.

I've been using Windows Mobile since WM5 (original AT&T Tilt) and it is actually a great operating system for power users. It was one of the better choices until Android matured (Android 2.x).

My next phone will be Android based, since Microsoft saw fit to utterly cripple WP7. It has a shiny UI but it is missing nearly all of the features, power, and flexibility that made me like WM5/6.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[CODiNE]

I like how you said "they ain't got shit on me" rather than "I haven't done anything". ;-)

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[thijsh]

Yeah ok, I think we're on the same page then... :)

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a Windows phone too and it's very stabl

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[zombiechan]

It has a shiny UI but it is missing nearly all of the features, power, and flexibility that made me like WM5/6

Which is sad, but most consumer didn't want that in a phone. They wanted an iPhone, so MS attempted to give them what they wanted.

WP7 isn't terrible, still a good OS(love my HTC Surround), it'll be better if it wasn't trying to be like iOS.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[Civil_Disobedient]

I'm just saying I'm close to the bottom of the list.

Very subtle.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[CaptSlaq]

I may just be too uncool, but I honestly don't do or say anything that would be worth the time of law enforcement.

I'm not saying its ok to just track everything everyone says, that would be a horrible practice, I'm just saying I'm close to the bottom of the list.

What you're not thinking about is what about when your favorite hobby x is deemed "double-plus ungood". This is the beginning of the slippery slope that none of us want to be involved in.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[houghi]

A. They already track you
B. They don't need shit on you
C. Because of A. and B. you are right.

And companies will bugger you no matter what. I have yet hear some marketing person say: Let's not contact these people as they are not in our target group. Instead they say: How can we rephrase it so it looks as if we targeting him personally.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

I also have a Windows Phone and it's very stabl

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

Right - the risk of getting bugged by FBI is usually lower than the risk of getting your identity stolen and abused.

At least that applies to most of us.

Unless, of course. your identity is being stolen by an "alphabet agency", such as the FBI or Ghsdkgj......(carrier lost)

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[geekoid]

You don't know that. If they where listening in*, you wouldn't know what they where hunting for.
You might say something perfectly innocent, but in the context of an investigation sound bad. Maybe you give to a charity that has ties to a terrorist organization so everyone who donated is under preliminary investigation.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a Windows phone too and it's very stabl

The first time through I read that last bit as "stab!".

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[Brannoncyll]

Given that Windows XP is decently stable, why would you FUD about Vista?

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

given that winmo 6.5 is decently stable, why would you FUD about phone 7?

Windows Phone 7 : Windows Mobile 6.5 :: iPhone : Apple Newton.

In terms of similarity, not necessarily quality.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[sorak]

But I would not complain about the phone's stability.

I would. It wasn't crashing every other day, but it did happen often enough. I used to joke that Windows is like an old man; once it goes to sleep, you never know if it will wake up. The WinMo phone had just a bit of that. Around once per month, I would look at the display and notice that it locked up about an hour ago.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[sgt_doom]

It definitely isn't the CIA.

-- Bob Smith, Techint Section

Check with Stephen Friedman over at In-Q-Tel, or Steve Carbone over at QintQ, they're probably in on it....

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[Andtalath]

The last day I used my winmo it crashed 10 times.
6 times while it booted.

It was in prime condition with standard firmware.

HP Ipaq 550.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[exomondo]

Given that Windows XP is decently stable, why would you FUD about Vista?

Because the Vista issues are Vista-specific, whereas many people are put off WP7 because of WinMo, but they are completely different operating systems.

Re:Good job, Microsoft

[shutdown -p now]

WP7 has a completely different target audience. If you're nostalgic about WM, get Android - it's where all the hacking is.

"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[John Hasler]

That can't be true. There are more than two reports.

Re:"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[Spad]

1.5 million as of end of December so somewhere between 0 and 60,000 affected users (assuming "Low single digit" maxes out at 4%).

Re:"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[Gruturo]

Actually that number comes with a big caveat since it started circulating a few weeks earlier, that even that mashable article, or the MS link it references, are carefully avoiding to shed light on. Those reported are 1.5 million handset sold "to carriers", or "by manufacturers" (which mostly sell to carriers, gosh).

For all we know, 90% of those 1.5 million might be still be unsold, sitting on shelves and warehouses and NOT in the hands of a customer. And that kind of carefully treading around the ambiguity is a giant, glowing, blinking warning sign..

Re:"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[jfruhlinger]

That 1.5 million number represents sales of phones by manufacturers to retailers, not sales of retailers to customers.

Re:"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[UnknowingFool]

This is how typically MS depicts success when it isn't. 1.5 million Windows phones have been sold to retailers and carriers, not to consumers. Considering that Dell, Garmin-Asus, HTC, HP , LG, Samsung, Sony Ericsson, Toshiba and Qualcomm all made phones and they were launched on the networks: AT&T, Deutsche Telekom, Orange, SFR, Sprint, Telecom Italia, Telefónica, Telstra, T-Mobile USA, Verizon Wireless, Vodafone, Telus, Bell Canada and SingTel, 1.5 million is abysmal. That's on average 100,000 per carrier and 160,000 per manufacturer. Remember that number also represents units that were given to MS employees. If I understand the process, MS employees could buy a phone and the company would reimburse them.

In this history of MS, they launched the Zune the same way. They showed great sales figures for the 2006 holiday season but what they didn't make clear was those were units shipped to retailers not sold to consumers. They also didn't disclose that for several months after that they shipped virtually no Zunes because the retailers were fully stocked. In the end, retailers had to get rid of the Zunes mostly at huge discounts.

Re:"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[Anonymous Coward]

That can't be true. There are more than two reports.

The nice thing about base ten is being able to represent a single digit with... wait for it... a single digit.

Re:"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[operagost]

Especially the brown ones. Seriously, Microsoft? I'd rather have a fake vinyl "woodgrain" than a turd-colored MP3 player.

Re:"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[UnknowingFool]

People complain that Apple is just good marketing and no substance compared to MS but the brown Zune is one example of failed marketing. Seriously who thought that turd brown was a good color? The Zune itself wasn't bad. The problem for MS was that every new Zune was competing with Apple's product from the previous year not Apple's current lineup. In the end, MS missed the opportunity. The PMP market is slowly shrinking and being supplanted by the smartphone or the "smart" PMP like the iPod Touch which again MS has no competing product.

Re:"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[Anonymous Coward]

What kind of FUD is this? Windows Phone 7 is currently GSM only meaning NO Verizon Wireless, NO Sprint, and probably NO to some of the others that I don't recognize (because you obviously don't have accurate information). Get your facts straight.

Re:"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[UnknowingFool]

My bad. I had read that Verizon launched a WP7 phone in November 2010. It turns out later that wasn't accurate. The latest word is "whenever the phones are ready." At this point, it appears MS has missed the holiday season with Verizon even though they said back in February 2010 that MS would launch the phone. Now Verizon has announced the iPhone, it'll be interesting to see whether Apple gets their phone out before MS even though MS promised theirs almost a year ago. But the fact still remains that MS has said 1.5 million phones were "shipped" not sold. LG has said the sales were not "what everyone expected."

Re:"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple did the same thing with the iPad numbers. Almost all manufacturers do the same thing...

Re:"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[Anonymous Coward]

so if noone's bought the phone, this can't be a problem....

Re:"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[UnknowingFool]

The two differences are that (1) Apple has retail stores so they know how exactly many they sold in their stores and (2) there is visible, actual demand for iPads and their other products. If you've ever been near an Apple store during the holiday season, you'd see that they were busy not just with foot traffic but sales as well. Apple doesn't define "sold" per se but I would think that even if they meant "shipped" the two numbers are probably close considering the high demand.

Re:"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[UnknowingFool]

Oh it's a problem. How many phone owners are affected will be small. I suspect that it only affected a unique setup with specific carrier/app being the problem more than the OS itself so the problem wasn't widespread even if WP7 sold 10 million phones to consumers.

Re:"a small (low single-digit) percentage"

[Anonymous Coward]

These phones manufactured in China and sold to the State Department??

Compensation? Class action?

[bazmail]

So is there going to be compensation for users scorched by this bug/feature? Class action suit anyone?

Re:Compensation? Class action?

[Grizzley9]

If my memory serves, iPhone owners were going through this same issue of having lots of data being sent in the middle of the night. AT&T's response was that it was just the system relaying the days usage all at once but many didn't buy that.

Corporate blame game

[Dunbal]

It doesn't matter. Someone at Microsoft ok'd that third party software without due diligence. It's their baby. Denying it just makes them look unprofessional. But we already knew that.

Re:Corporate blame game

[CuriousGeorge113]

They didn't "Deny" it, they said "We found the problem" and "The problem is x" and "We are working with the vendor who published Product X" so that "This problem can be fixed" and "We can develop standards to prevent other applications from reproducing the same scenario."

Saying that it's their problem just because they approved it is a gross over-simplification of the situation. When the Goodyear tires that came with Ford vehicles started to fail and explode, Ford worked with Goodyear to get the problem fixed and the faulty tires replaced, but it was ultimately Goodyear's responsibility to replace their defective product.

Re:Corporate blame game

[Anonymous Coward]

They didn't "Deny" it, they said "We found the problem" and "The problem is x" and "We are working with the vendor who published Product X" so that "This problem can be fixed"

Have they committed to a deadline when this will be fixed? Have they given information that allows affected users to mitigate this behaviour? Have they offered to compensate users that receive astronomical bills for data usage?

"We can develop standards to prevent other applications from reproducing the same scenario."

Is this an admission that there were no standards beforehand? Was WinMo7 marketed to developers as an "everything goes" platform, i.e. were they selling out their customers before there were any?

Saying that it's their problem just because they approved it is a gross over-simplification of the situation.

Huh? Are you saying that "user purchases Microsoft product, gets burned (again)" is not Microsoft's problem?

When the Goodyear tires that came with Ford vehicles started to fail and explode, Ford worked with Goodyear to get the problem fixed and the faulty tires replaced, but it was ultimately Goodyear's responsibility to replace their defective product.

Ford also publicly named GoodYear as the source of the defects. Microsoft is shielding the source of the defect, so all blame rightfully goes to them.

Re:Corporate blame game

[__aaqvdr516]

How much time must MS devote to a single application before they release it? You can't reasonably expect that they look at every line of code and use the program for weeks before accepting it. The Washington Post wrote that many people believe this 3rd party app to be an email program:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fasterforward/2011/01/microsoft_ids_wp7_third-party.html

The only function of an email program is to send and receive data. I'm sure that in their testing they made sure it did what it said it did. The small amount of data that might have been sent during testing was likely masked by the actual tests (if they were even done at all...I'm not a tester).

Re:Corporate blame game

[Anonymous Coward]

What the fuck are you blabbering about moron? If HTC or Motorola fuck up their phone, its not Google/Anrdoid's fault. MS helped out the manufacturer unlike Google who basically throws partners under the bus by avoiding responsibility and suggesting Oracle sue each individual manufacturer w.r.t. android patents. I hope you're getting paid for trolling...

Re:Corporate blame game

[Dunbal]

I don't know how it's done at Microsoft, but I am familiar with a few "Fortune 500"'s and their SOP, and you'd be surprised to know how few of them actually believe in consumer testing. Failing to do this is no one's fault but the manufacturer's despite your apologist stance.

If you put your name on a product and make money from a product, you are responsible for that product and all the good and bad that goes with it - especially if the problem comes about through regular everyday use and not extreme or abusive conditions. Saying "we didn't know" is only admitting incompetence. If you develop a product for use in the "real world" and not a lab, you need to test it in "real world" conditions with "real people". I can't believe no one noticed 5MB/day, every day.

Re:Corporate blame game

[tibman]

I can't believe no one noticed 5MB/day, every day.

I'm with you. 5MB/day is ~60 bytes/sec. Something is very wrong! That ammount of continuous reporting is beyond strange or accidental.

Re:Corporate blame game

[exomondo]

It doesn't matter. Someone at Microsoft ok'd that third party software without due diligence. It's their baby. Denying it just makes them look unprofessional. But we already knew that.

Sounds almost identical to this.

Re:Corporate blame game

[exomondo]

It doesn't matter. Someone at Microsoft ok'd that third party software without due diligence. It's their baby. Denying it just makes them look unprofessional. But we already knew that.

Sounds almost identical to this.

*fixed...

Explains?

[bgarcia]

So, Microsoft saying "it wasn't us, it was them" counts as an explanation?

Re:Explains?

[Aerynvala]

The politicians use it, why wouldn't their corporate masters?

3rd Party?

[Stenchwarrior]

Can it still be considered 3rd party if the company that generated the "phantom data" was contracted by either the carrier or Microsoft to develop the app to intentionally run up the quota, hopefully going unnoticed and generating overage charges? My ex-bank, 5th3rd has a class-action lawsuit against them for doing something similar.

Re:3rd Party?

[RMH101]

Well, yes. My Windows 7 work phone, for example, runs on the UK Orange network. It came in an Orange-branded box, it has Orange-branding within the phone software, and Orange apps bundled with it that can't be removed. Annoying, yes, but standard practice in the phone world. It also has HTC-specific apps built into it such as the HTC hub.
If it turns out that a network is bundling crapware with the handset that uses too much data in some conditions, or a vendor such as HTC has a bug in their app, then I wouldn't blame MS for it.
It's a big "if", but it's a definite possibility and until we know the reason I suggest we stop getting so hysterical about it.

Re:3rd Party?

[jeffgeno]

What apps can't be removed? The ability to remove any carrier or manufacturer apps is one of the platform requirements. I was able to junk all of the AT&T and Samsung stuff I don't use on mine just like I would anything else.

Re:3rd Party?

[Z00L00K]

If the telecom operator provides a branded phone with apps that can't be removed and one of those apps is eating your data traffic then you should get that data traffic for free.

Re:3rd Party?

[RMH101]

actually, I've just double checked, and you're correct! Sorry. I still have an Orange-branded splash screen on boot, but no big problem. But I stand corrected, the Orange apps are uninstallable.

Re:3rd Party?

[Anonymous Coward]

...until we know the reason I suggest we stop getting so hysterical about it.

That's not how things work on Slashdot. People come here specifically for an excuse to get hysterical about things, especially anything to do with Microsoft. You can take any moderately "bad" event in existence, and someone around here will find a way to spin it so that it's Microsoft's fault.

Re:3rd Party?

[TheEyes]

If the telecom operator provides a branded phone with apps that can't be removed and one of those apps is eating your data traffic then you should get that data traffic for free.

Sure you "should". But will you, without some kind of lawsuit? Probably not.

The new US customer service model: the customer is always wrong, and largely irrelevant.

Re:3rd Party?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, *I've* heard that they did it deliberately so that your phone's radio would always be on. Then, as everyone gets cancer from the radiation, the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, which is secretly a for-profit corporation making money on healthcare and drug research, can sell a cancer cure for all those people who now have crotch and ass tumors! Diabolical!

Re:3rd Party?

[v1]

I'd expect that if it was a carrier-specific issue, that connection would easily have been figured out by this point.

Considering nobody (outside MS apparently) has found a common link yet leads one to believe the problem exists on every phone, and is being triggered either randomly or by some obscure circumstances. (does your ESN end in "000"?)

Now we're all fairly well aware that MS isn't too brilliant with their P.R., but to tell your customers "yes, we found out what's causing this known issue, we know who's responsible, but we're not going to tell you" doesn't sound like something that even they would pull without good reason to protect themselves from something.

So without being able to get specific about it, I think it's safe to assume it's something you'd prefer to know and that MS would really prefer you not. And that can't be good regardless of what it is. The whole "tinfoil hat" thing implies a good leap of faith is being made, but in this case we're fairly well assured that something unpleasant is really happening, even if we don't know all the details.

Re:3rd Party?

[Anonymous Coward]

You certainly should blame MS for it.

After all, they allowed Orange and HTC to add all kinds of crap to their phone. My iPhone didn't include anything but what Apple put on it, the only place AT&T shows up is in the status bar to identify the network it's attached to. When the Verizon iPhone comes out, I guarantee the only place Verizon will show up is that same spot.

Now that the carriers have blinked first for Apple, why isn't every other device maker demanding they keep the crap off their phones too? There's no excuse any more.

Re:3rd Party?

[HiThere]

If they won't identify the problem application, then MS is the one who should be blamed. It doesn't really matter what the excuse, if they won't either fix it or explain how you can fix it, it's their fault.

Doesn't matter if it's a third party application. MS is the only one who knows which third party application, and they won't tell. So it's their fault. They may, or may not, have instigated the problem. We can't tell. And saying "I didn't do it!" isn't much of a defense. We aren't a court of criminal law. (Even there it looks as if MS would be an accessory both before, during, and after the crime.)

Re:3rd Party?

[HiThere]

I presume that's a joke, as we don't have nearly enough information to conclude that. However to be a good joke it would need to be clearly implausible. Unfortunately, the ethical history of MS doesn't make that part of the motivation implausible at all.

OTOH, interpreting it as a joke, the complex conspiracy required among groups that don't usually work together makes it rather unlikely. And the evidence that cell phone radiation causes cancer in a reasonably short time frame is extremely sparse. It exists, but it's not terribly convincing.

Still, I wouldn't put it past them. Unfortunately, if they have a cancer cure, they haven't yet demonstrated it.

(Hint: This is a critique of the joke. By taking it seriously. I *was* a bit shocked at how plausibly it worked up.)

Re:3rd Party?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, its all about the data. Microsoft wouldn't stoop so low for the money.

It gets better

[qmaqdk]

Apparently* it's an external problem and there will be "no need for a system software update.".

Makes you wonder about who can do what with your Windows Phone 7...

*As I noted in my submission. Which was earlier. WTF editors!?

Re:It gets better

[laddiebuck]

An obvious contradiction, i.e. lie.

Re:It gets better

[exomondo]

Apparently* it's an external problem and there will be "no need for a system software update.".

Makes you wonder about who can do what with your Windows Phone 7...

*As I noted in my submission. Which was earlier. WTF editors!?

Or your Android device or your iPhone. Newsflash, it's a smartphone and it's tied to a carrier, just about every smartphone platform has had this very same issue - pretty much exclusively on AT&T - yet some people aren't noticing the pattern.

Re:It gets better

[Anonymous Coward]

To me, it sounds like a problem with either the GMail or Facebook syncing protocol. Either too verbose or too frequent polls for updates. Those things could be solved with a server-side configuration change.

Re:It gets better

[im_thatoneguy]

Ummmm... do you want apps to not be able to upload and download data? The Zune app downloads hundreds of megabytes per week on my account. That's... what I want it to do. If it didn't do that I wouldn't use it.

WP7 (and others) needs a utility

[chemicaldave]

They need a utility built-in to the phone that logs which processes/programs are sending how much data over which connection. None of this "unnamed third-party program" bullshit.

Re:WP7 (and others) needs a utility

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, that makes sense and would be really useful. But are you kidding? If they built that in, the first thing the carriers do would be to either: A) strip that software tool out, or B) drop Win 7 phones, because it would mean you could track data use and which applications were the hogs, allowing you to better-manage your connection time/bandwidth. This is not a feature desired by carriers even if it is a no-brainer for customers.

But maybe I'm wrong and it's been allowed. Are there any phones/apps out there that will give you an up-to-the-minute accounting of what you've used in your data and/or voice plans?

Re:WP7 (and others) needs a utility

[Anonymous Coward]

One of Microsoft's mantras has long been to hide information from the user.

Re:WP7 (and others) needs a utility

[quacking duck]

One of Microsoft's mantras has long been to hide information from the user.

Proving, once again, that all Microsoft does is follow Apple's lead ;-)

Re:WP7 (and others) needs a utility

[Anonymous Coward]

They need a utility built-in to the phone that logs which processes/programs are sending how much data over which connection.

What did you think the phone was transferring back to Microsoft's servers?

They're being decent at least

[Altesse]

Not to defend Microsoft here, but if really the OS is not to blame, and it's a third party app that causes this phantom data, at least they have the decency of keeping the name of the responsible undisclosed, to avoid them a bad publicity.

Re:They're being decent at least

[Aerynvala]

I don't understand how that is being decent? An application is causing excess data to be used without the customer's permission and it's good of Microsoft not to name names?

Re:They're being decent at least

[zombiechan]

Microsoft is just not a tattletale

Re:They're being decent at least

[Aerynvala]

Oh, well then, two gold stars for them!

Re:They're being decent at least

[Altesse]

I don't like Microsoft, but I'm convinced that had they named the responsible app, they would have been flaimebaited to death here.

They're just leaving the choice to the third party creator, to get out of the woods or not, I think it's decent, yes. Now maybe they're just doing that because they have strong ties, financial or others, with that company, or because it's a lack of documentation that caused this, or just plainly because there is no third party app at all, I don't know. But from what I can see and judge with, I think it's the decent way to act.

Re:They're being decent at least

[Aerynvala]

Like a good /. reader I did not actually read TFA, but unless they are also disabling this unnamed app and thus keeping it from screwing over more customers, then I don't consider MS' behavior to be decent. And I'll stop there.

Re:They're being decent at least

[Anonymous Coward]

For a short time yes, quite possible they have identified one culprit or causing circumstance but may be still be investing others as well as how to provide a solution for the problem(s) past and maybe in the future, not to mention give their 3rd party partner an window of opportunity to fix the problem prior to outing them. Give it a couple of weeks I'll bet we'll have all the details, if not then at that point I'd agree MS will be in the wrong for not releasing details.

Re:They're being decent at least

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean, yeah, it's decent to the other unnamed conglomerate. It's the really nice thing to do for them. Not for the customers, but nice for the other corporation, who shall remain nameless.

Imagine if this was something really serious, and not just data usage. Imagine MS made cars, and the cars were crashing for no reason, and MS came forward and said "We looked into it, and we found that we are not legally responsible, and it's a third party car accessory that's causing these crashes. They're working on fixing it, but until then, all you people with our cars can go fuck yourselves, and having fun driving your Microsoft Brand Windows 7 Deathtraps."

Would that be the 'decent' thing to do? To put the security of their customers behind the PR of a third party? Of course not.

WGA program

[Anonymous Coward]

Are we sure it's not just the phone calling home (Microsoft) to confirm it's a "Genuine Copy"?

What data?

[mvar]

So it was a 3rd party application which they do not name. Perhaps they could at least explain what kind of data were being sent... oh wait..

No one here has a Windows phone?

[hunangarden]

So no one here has a Windows phone 7?

Probably pretty easy to monitor what's flowing through your home router if you're on wi-fi.

Is this a problem with all phone's or just if people installed some nefarious app?

Re:No one here has a Windows phone?

[Wamoc]

So no one here has a Windows phone 7?

Probably pretty easy to monitor what's flowing through your home router if you're on wi-fi.

The phantom data has been over 3G even if the phone is connected to wi-fi. This idea sadly wont work.

Is this a problem with all phone's or just if people installed some nefarious app?

The article says it is a third party app.

Re:No one here has a Windows phone?

[Threni]

Depends on the router. Most cheap routers won't let you see what's going on.

Re:No one here has a Windows phone?

[UnknowingFool]

It's a 3G problem. From the descriptions it appeared to be certain phones on certain carriers. My best guess is that some service was mis-configured to continuously send data instead of bursting it or not to send it all. The size of the data seems to suggest that logging was inadvertently turned on and sending.

Re:No one here has a Windows phone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Simple solution but a hub between the router and the modem, DSL or Cable, and throw an old machine with Linux and a sniffer program on it. I know you can't do this if your modem and your router are in the same box but you're talking cheap routers so I'd wager there's a separate modem somewhere.

Re:No one here has a Windows phone?

[hunangarden]

I didn't see anything in TFA about it being on 3G only (obviously happens over 3G or people wouldn't care about their data plans, but is it 3G only), but maybe in one of the referred links from the article? I know that article says that Microsoft says the "problems" were caused "by an unnamed "third party" service. Which sounds a bit different than a 3rd party app. Maybe something that comes as part of WP7 OS or pre-installed, but was written by a 3rd party.

Anyway speculation is sort of pointless, which is why I was hoping that someone had done some actual testing themselves and maybe discovered a thing or 2.

Yahoo Mail

[__aazsst3756]

Yahoo mail app being reported other places. Figures

Yahoo!

[leuk_he]

According to ars, Yahoo mail might be the one to blame.

"All very peculiar. The main culprit fingered by the Windows Phone 7 community over this issue (though not named in the statement) is Yahoo! Mail."

Re:Yahoo!

[belgianguy]

As they've done some bartering with the search engine stuff I could see them protect each other. Microsoft doesn't need any bad PR in the mobile market (remember the KIN? No? QED), and on top of that WP7 isn't that ooh-la-la either (a day late and a dollar short). Flaws like these could turn away the most loyal fans.

Yahoo has had its fair share of lambasting after the whole delicious affair and probably doesn't need another PR disaster.

Why else would this be an 'unnamed third party'?

They're not just pointing fingers

[confused one]

I'm glad y'all RTFA and saw where it said

"We are in contact with the third party to assist them in making the necessary fixes," a spokesperson said. The firm also said that it was looking into "potential workarounds" until the issue was solved.

fwiw, there's evidence that one potential culprit was a yahoo mail client

Re:They're not just pointing fingers

[Anonymous Coward]

fwiw, there's evidence that one potential culprit was a yahoo mail client

It's the IPv6 issue!

That's an "explanation"?

[1u3hr]

An "unnamed third party service" is an explanation? As much as "a dog ate my homework".

Re:That's an "explanation"?

[hal2814]

It's better than "You're holding it wrong."

Re:That's an "explanation"?

[supernes]

How is it better? His holiness points out you're holding it wrong, you stop holding it wrong, problem solved! Microsoft tells you it's a third-party app, what do you do? Stop using third-party apps? Oh wait...

Re:That's an "explanation"?

[c 0xFF]

It's better because one blames an anonymous third party while the other blames the user.

Even if it really is Microsoft's fault in some way (such as a failure to test ... boy does that sound familiar), at least they aren't blaming ME for their own mistakes.

Re:That's an "explanation"?

[Anonymous Coward]

"You're holding it wrong" is a perfectly valid explanation. It may be a broken design, but it's a good explanation and can be followed naturally by a workaround "hold it like this".

"An unnamed third party service" is a horrible explanation because there's no way how it can be followed by a workaround. "Disable the Yahoo mail client" ? - Not really unnamed anymore. "Disable everything" - well, that's hardly a solution. "Return to vender, it's defective" ? Not going to fly either.

Gee, how helpful...

[Jugalator]

So Microsoft won't tell their users who have problems WHICH software is offending here? Seriously? I'm sure their affected WP7 users just love being denied that information while paying AT&T the bills for their nightly "activities" due to a "third party service". At least they'd be able to turn it off while waiting for a fix if they knew which software caused the problems.

Single Digit Percentage...

[landswipe]

Yep, 9.999999999% with +/- 500% tolerance.

Re:Single Digit Percentage...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, 9.999999999% with +/- 500% tolerance.

That's not single-digit. An example of single-digit percentage would be 1E2%

Developers/Partners before Users

[erroneus]

Who does Microsoft care more about? Users or Developers and Partners? Their actions speak louder than words. They are reluctant to tell people the truth so that they can protect themselves or conserve their resources in favor of protecting developers and partners. In the world of Microsoft (and indeed Apple and most other commercial software vendors) the users are to be taken for granted and abuse of users, their information, their computers and their resources are all the norm.

I realize this is more preaching to the choir for most people here and/or this is "stating the obvious" but I think it's sometimes useful to remind people and users of where the priorities and motivations of the vendors they use and rely on are. By knowing their priorities and motivations, you can keep yourself appropriately aware and even guarded. For example, we have a LOT og Google fans here. In the eyes of some, Google does no evil and can do no wrong. They are an advertiser and a marketer and maintain all of the priorities and motivations of advertisers and marketers. It is important to keep Google in perspective. Google is just one example. Microsoft's main strategy is to keep their markets saturated with Microsoft products and services. This is accomplished through strategic partnerships and arrangements with OEMs and resellers among others. This means they place their priorities in favor of those channels; partners, OEMs, developers and all. If Microsoft's primary channel was retail and online sales, their priority would then be focused on the people who buy their products and services directly. But this is, for the most part, not the case.

For this reason ("Who does Microsoft care about?") I generally avoid Microsoft. It is not because they are buggy or insecure or "evil." It is the fact that as a user or customer, they are not interested in my needs or interests. That's a simple fact.

Re:Developers/Partners before Users

[Missing.Matter]

If they didn't care why would they fix it at all? A company that doesn't care about its customers would deny this is even happening, or simply not respond at all.

Re:Developers/Partners before Users

[erroneus]

That is a good question and I think the answer is in maintaining their position. They do only what is necessary and skip anything deemed unnecessary. This explains their reluctance to acknowledge and to fix even the most critical of security flaws. So why fix it at all? Because without it, all users would stop using it.

So there is a state of basic functionality that must be maintained, but that should not be confused with "caring about the user's interests" beyond their ability to continue using the products and services. Aside from that, I assert that the situation I describe is a matter of prioritization where users come after all other interests including the music/entertainment industry, government spying, the telecom industry and more.

Re:Developers/Partners before Users

[mcgrew]

Who does Microsoft care more about? Users or Developers and Partners?

They have no reason to care about users, since few users are actually customers. That copy of Windows on your Dell doesn't make you a Microsoft customer, it makes Dell their customer unless you bought Windows in a box and installed it yourself. Few enough people do that to make them completely unimportant to MS.

Re:Developers/Partners before Users

[Anonymous Coward]

Get a grip, this is simply about not embarrassing one of their top partners or carriers till they at least have a solution ready.
Why would they help tarnish one (or maybe more) of their own top partners unnecessarily, not to mention help hype a relatively limited issue tied to their flagship phone that sounds like will be resolved in short order. Sounds to me like they've communicated what was needed and known for sure for now, that yes it does appear there is a limited issue, it seems to have been tracked down and the third party has been tasked with addressing it. Yes we're all curious who the 3rd party is, FB, yahoo, WinLive team, whomever it is will come out soon enough.

Does smell like an opportunity for someone to write an app for tracking process data transfer usage for w7 phones if such an app does not already exist.

Re:Developers/Partners before Users

[houghi]

unless you bought Windows in a box and installed it yourself.

AND bought it directly from Microsoft and not some other in-between company, be it online or brick-an-mortar.

Re:Developers/Partners before Users

[springbox]

So I'm not a Nintendo customer if I buy a 3DS from Amazon?

explains what?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm still looking for an explanation because so far they've said, it's not us it's the software we've approved.

Unnamed?

[Charliemopps]

If they refuse to tell anyone what this "Unnamed 3rd party service" is... then I think it's well within our rights to assume the worst. The FBI/CIA really aren't all that creative.

My suggestion? British Petroleum. They are tracking out movements to determine the best place to have the next oil slick. If no ones around, no one will notice.

any other suggestions? Once we decide on a winner we can go update Wikipedia with our "Facts" and start spreading it around the internet via forums and blog posts. Remember, if it's too ridiculous, no one will believe it... so try and keep your suggestions within reason.

Re:Unnamed?

[John Hasler]

> any other suggestions?

Surely Sarah Palin must be involved.

Why not tell what app is costing users money ?

[terminal.dk]

Why don't Microsoft tell users what 3rd party app is costing them money ?

Users should have a possibility of deleting or disabling the offending app. As it is now, Microsoft should get the bill for this data forwarded. They know about it and do not act. here in Denmark that is reason for court action, it is actively taking responsibility if you do not act in a timely manner.

Or maybe Microsoft is getting their percentage of the money for data transfer ? So it is money straight in their pocket.

Drop MS, go for the walled garden.

Choosing iPhone/WinPho7/Android just got easier

[phonewebcam]

So, you can have a phone you have to figure out how to hold before you make a call, a phone you have to make all your calls at the start of the month quickly before it drains all your allowance or the other one which does neither. Hmm...

Re:Choosing iPhone/WinPho7/Android just got easier

[LoganDzwon]

however the 3rd choice only has about a 4 hour battery life and you have do a ton of research to make it doesn't wipe your OS, works with your company's excahnge servers, doesn't lie to do so, and also have viruses...

Re:Choosing iPhone/WinPho7/Android just got easier

[PmanAce]

My Android lasts around 1 day of regular nerd use (4 different launchers, tons of widgets, etc...) and is hooked up to my work's MS exchange account with no viruses.

Unnamed third party?

[Anonymous Coward]

NSA? CIA?

Re:"Unnamed third party service" being M$

[hAckz0r]

My bet is the "Windows Live" service. Why? The one complaint I saw with anything significant to say was a person complaining that they had everything turned off *except* for their Facebook sync through 'Windows live'. My bet, chances are that the Sync is pulling over all the images and bitmaps along with the web updates, and not pulling over just the delta changes to them. Perhaps its a re-download service, not a true sync.

If At&T is the primary service then Windows Live is a third party to that service. Since Microsoft did not name themselves as the culprit, they are in fact an Unnamed service. And of course why would Microsoft want to piss off their own their own management, or worse, to let potential buyers know what the real problem is?

A and B are mutually exclusive

[mangu]

A. They will track me anyway if they have any reason to.
B. They aint got shit on me.

If they keep tracking you, they will have pretty soon.

Eating away

[jandersen]

...an amount that would eat into a 1GB allowance in 20 days

A strange expression - I would have thought even 1 byte would "eat into" any size allowance, technically speaking.

Re:Eating away

[geekoid]

SO your complaint is that it is too accurate~

Yeah, 'eat through' would have been better

Re:Eating away

[jandersen]

Who said anything about a complaint? I was just making an idle observation.

Re:Eating away

[BillX]

even 1 byte would "eat into" any size allowance

I see what u did there!

Please.......

[Anonymous Coward]

Everybody has to bitch and fuss about EVERY FUCKING THING. All of you motherfuckers are WORSE THAN WOMEN when it comes to shit like this. Bitch, bitch, bitch this,,,bitch, bitch, bitch that..HOW FICKING WHINY CAN YOU BASTARDS GET. STOP ALREADY.

So Microsoft fucked up. They don't have to tell YOU what the problem is, you don't own them.

Fanboys of other platforms, STICK TO THAT FUCKING PLATFORM and stay the fuck out of these forums.
Assholes. Go bitch about iOS now or Blandroid..

Fucking butt-babies..

Re:Please.......

[Anonymous Coward]

I think someone needs a nap.

Re:Please.......

[Anonymous Coward]

Steve, get back to work!!!!

- Bill

Carrier?

[kellyb9]

I'm going to preface this by saying that I don't really know a single person who has this phone, but phantom 3rd party data seems like is would be software installed by the carrier. MS just doesn't want to throw whoever the carrier is under the bus. When I got my Droid phone, there was a bunch of bloatware installed by Verizon. That's just my guess... it could be the NSA or the FBI or NASA for all I know.

Re:Carrier?

[geekoid]

Eve notice that the idiots always screaming about it being the FBI or NSA can't explain why those agency would bother to put somethin on a phone when they can get a court order to get your information directly from the carrier.

unnamed third party service ..

[doperative]

> Microsoft said its investigation found that most problems were caused by a unnamed "third party" service ..

In other words, we're making this shit up !!!

So now,

[roc97007]

Somebody without a stake in the answer needs to do the analysis.

200k almost enough for me

[SuperKendall]

I have an iPhone on AT&T. Currently I subscribe to the 2GB plan but the reality is that I use just over 200kb a month (just enough I can't get the cheapest plan).

I use the phone all the time for data, so how can I use so little? It's because most of the time I'm at home or work, both places with WiFi. In-between the largest data use is either browsing or network map loading from Waze, a free driving/gps applciation I leave on whenever I drive.

There are LOTS of people that would have plenty of room in a 500k plan.

FYI the phantom service name is DHS_fltr.sys - NT

[Anonymous Coward]

FYI the phantom service name is DHS_fltr.sys

Re:"Unnamed third party service" being M$

[geekoid]

It would be classic if it was downloading the same unchanged image. I have seen that type of error 100's of times throughout my career. In fact, when something had a memory leak, unnecessary image repainting is one of the first things look for.

Microsoft is a known channel stuffer

[Anonymous Coward]

They've inflated sales of Zune, Xbox 360, and other products via channel stuffing. Why not Windows 7 phones too?

Re:"Unnamed third party service" being M$

[Anonymous Coward]

Facebook was my first thought when reading the article. I made the mistake of installing facebook sync on my blackberry and it was totally crushing the phone. Available memory was at zero, any action resulted in at least 30 seconds of the "hour glass" icon, battery was only lasting about 12 hours, etc. I haven't checked my data usage lately since it is unlimited anyway but it won't surprise me if it is way up. Deleted the app and was still having problems because it wouldn't finish removing itself until I did a full reset by removing the battery.

100% chance of being bugged...

[schlachter]

I think the chances of being bugged by our gov are around 100%....with a little help from our mobile providers, ISPs, etc. The risk of those taps ever being examined (by a human - I imagine all are examined by machine) and used are near 0%.

Re:"Unnamed third party service" being M$

[JWSmythe]

    I wouldn't be terribly surprised if that was the case.

    I know the Facebook app on Blackberry (not Windows Live) keeps the phone very busy. Both my girlfriend and I had Blackberry 8330's. She installed the Facebook app, and found the phone to be unresponsive at times (like about 3 times a week). I installed it on mine, and the same happened. Uninstalling it fixed the problem. Otherwise, we'd find the phones not working, and have to remove the battery to reboot it (the buttons were unresponsive).

    Besides being unresponsive, it was horribly slow trying to do anything on the Internet (over the 3G network). Uninstalling the app fixed it. I know they synchronize profile pictures, so I'd suspect repeatedly downloading the profile pictures. If it worked properly, I wouldn't mind. I have no download quota through my provider. It doesn't do me a lot of good for my phone to lock up though.

    I wouldn't think that the Win7 phone is much different than the Blackberry app, at least in general behavior.

Steve!

[ThatsNotPudding]

You're supposed to be on medical leave!

in other news,

[alien9]

microsoft explaining the meaning of explaining something....

Too many Phantoms...

[sgt_doom]

First there was the Phantom of the Opera.

Then there was that Phantom of the Jungle.

And now there's the Phantom of Data.

This is becoming way too complex.

No doubt,

[Anonymous Coward]

your submission didn't blame Microsoft enough to meet Slashdot standards.

Re:"Unnamed third party service" being M$

[exomondo]

My bet is the "Windows Live" service. Why? The one complaint I saw with anything significant to say was a person complaining that they had everything turned off *except* for their Facebook sync through 'Windows live'. My bet, chances are that the Sync is pulling over all the images and bitmaps along with the web updates, and not pulling over just the delta changes to them. Perhaps its a re-download service, not a true sync.

Nah it's not that, i've got a crapload of stuff syncing via windows live and don't have this issue.

If At&T is the primary service then Windows Live is a third party to that service.

I would say it's something to do with AT&T but likely MS don't want to just blame them and affect their relationship, rather fix the issue quietly and move on. But it would be nice to know what it was.

Phone 7

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember reading the inital article saying it was mostly affecting AT&T Customers. I check my data usage fairly frequently (which I can do using the carriers unmetered website) and the heaviest day I've ever used is like 15mb. That includes all the facebook sync, web browsing and downloading a couple apps. I would chock this up to a third party app that's just pulling down a ton of data. None of the others in my office (we're a IT consulting company) that own windows 7 phones are having any issues either.

As for the phone , it's awesome and I love it. (this coming from a former iphone user). The interface is intuitive, fast and very stable. It's missing some key features,which annoyed me to no end, but MS has already announced an update to address them.

Some things need to get better, but all in all, it's a very solid phone and belongs with the android and iphones. Hopefully the app market actually matures though, that's it's major downfall right now.

Why wouldn't you just

[Anonymous Coward]

1.Disable 3G on the phone
2.Put a transparent proxy on the wireless that the phone uses
3.Looking at what sites the phone is trying to access to send data to

Although admittedly most people who know how to do the above probably wouldn't buy a windows phone ;-)

Anyone remember B3D Projector?

[BillX]

I agree. Personally, while it could just be a "we're too chicken to piss them off" megavendor with a bona fide mistake, the conspiracy theorist in me suggests the possibility that someone at the "third party vendor" multiplied the CPU speed of an always-on WP7 phone by the anticipated number of deployed units and a big, $-shaped lightbulb lit up over their heads. Back in 2000 or so, before "cloud computing" became the buzzword for such things, some p2p clients were being distributed with spyware that would allow your idle CPU cycles, bandwidth and disk space to be rented out to third parties unknown. (The 'b3dprojector' named in the subject was put out by a multimedia company to create an unwitting Bittorrent-like hosting network for swarm downloading.) I bet having something like this slip by all the way to shipping phones would be a huge kick in the nuts to WinFone7 sales if MS let word of it get out...

If it is the case, the reason would be

[Ilgaz]

I'm glad y'all RTFA and saw where it said

"We are in contact with the third party to assist them in making the necessary fixes," a spokesperson said.

The firm also said that it was looking into "potential workarounds" until the issue was solved.

fwiw, there's evidence that one potential culprit was a yahoo mail client

Funniest thing is, even if you pay to Yahoo, you won't get IMAP support including standard IDLE support.

So while you monkey with POP3 and very funny tricks (for 2011) like "leave messages on server", you will also notice the same idiots somehow gives a similar and non standard service FOR FREE to iPhone/iPad owners. What is worse is, it probably uses HTTP protocol which wasn't absolutely designed for such thing.

My bet is, Windows Phone 7 also comes with free IMAP IDLE-like but not IMAP support and somehow, while messing around with re-inventing the wheel, they did something wrong.

It is karma of paying customers who has to monkey with outdated POP3 protocol.

How many phones in a single digit

[lsatenstein]

Just asking about MS's statement about small numbers.