Verizon To Drop Unlimited Data Plans In Two Weeks

itwbennett writes "The rumors have converged and now it appears that Verizon will be dropping its unlimited data plans on July 7, says blogger Peter Smith. Droid-Life lists pricing, starting at 2 GB for $30/month and going up to 10 GB for $80/month. 'The one ever-so-slightly bright side,' says Smith, 'is that 4G LTE will cost the same as 3G. Of course, you'll be able to burn through your data even faster.'"

Comments

Pay-you-go

[Anonymous Coward]

Time to drop Verizon, methinks.

Re:Pay-you-go

[Life2Death]

I didnt like verizon before, but got drug with alltel to them. Alltel had great things like unlimited 3G modems for laptops and unlocked phones (basically oem fresh) with maybe a logo or some minor branding installed.

Verizon steps in and wipes out the only company doing this, and takes everything away from the users. I dont need a phone that bad, I guess.

Re:Pay-you-go

[alen]

and go to sprint with their spotty coverage?

Re:Pay-you-go

[Local ID10T]

Metro PCS ...here I come.

Flat rate, unlimited, service quality is good where they have coverage, and coverage is much better than it was a few years ago.

Re:Pay-you-go

[FredFredrickson]

Just in time for the netflix app. Coincidence? I think not. Honestly, as a member with 5 lines, they'll feel the sting as more people like me switch. I'll go through the hassle of switching before I take it up the ass with a plan change like this.

Re:Pay-you-go

[Mordok-DestroyerOfWo]

I just hope the T-Mobile merger doesn't go through. I may only have 2GB with them, but if I go over there is no overage, just the possibility of being throttled (note: I have yet to be throttled, even at 3.8 GB last month).

Re:Pay-you-go

[h4rr4r]

They roam onto the verizon network, so their coverage is only as spotty as verizon for voice.

Re:Pay-you-go

[Scyber]

If you have multiple lines, then there might be something in it for you depending on your usage. There is a rumor of shared family data plans. That is you can pay the $50 once and share 5gb across all of the phones on your plan. Obviously it depends on your usage, but I know that it could save me money. I currently pay $30 each for "unlimited" data on my two lines. I use ~3-4GB/month and my wife uses 200mb/month. The 5GB plan could save me $10/month if it was shared across phone lines. Of course this is merely a rumor at this point.

Re:Pay-you-go

[Anonymous Coward]

I may be going there when the AT&T/T-Mobile merger is complete (with T-Mo now, and happy with them). My ex-wife just signed up with Metro PCS. I'll let her be my guinea pig and see if they still deserve the "Ghetto PCS" nickname.

Re:Pay-you-go

[SenseiLeNoir]

Actually my greatest concern is that over here in the UK, our data plans are relatively "ok priced" from some providers, but no way as good as they used to be a couple of years back. 3 still provide unlimited plans, T-Mobile provides a 10gb plan, which you can use for anything, including voip, tethering, etc, for abotu £28 ($35).

However, whenever USA increases something, we find the UK providers following suite to "harmonise" the market.. grrrr.

Re:Pay-you-go

[shadowfaxcrx]

Yep. Me too. Sprint actually has a plan that's 300 minutes more and $10 cheaper than my Verizon plan. I've been holding off on switching because of Verizon's network, but this is ridiculous. Can anyone verify that Sprint's unlimited data is actually unlimited, 3G and 4G, with no hidden caps? It's what the salesman claimed, but who trusts them?

Re:Pay-you-go

[TheCRAIGGERS]

They roam onto the verizon network, so their coverage is only as spotty as verizon for voice.

That would have been just dandy ten years ago.

Now, between GPS, GoogleTalk, and the other various social services out there, I pay more attention to data coverage than I do voice. Yes, having voice is important too in case you need medical attention, etc... but as far as usage goes, I'm 99% data. Dropping down to roaming data speeds does not a fun experience make.

Re:Pay-you-go

[tycoex]

Technically the Sprint plan is indeed unlimited, but they do charge you extra if you want to tether (or use the "mobile hot spot").

There has been some complaint of sprint getting angry at customers who were using upwards of 20gigs a month on their phone, but I think that's because they were almost certainly tethering to a pc and downloading things without paying the tethering fee. The complaints come out because they are butthurt they got caught.

Re:Pay-you-go

[Colonel Korn]

They roam onto the verizon network, so their coverage is only as spotty as verizon for voice.

That would have been just dandy ten years ago.

Now, between GPS, GoogleTalk, and the other various social services out there, I pay more attention to data coverage than I do voice. Yes, having voice is important too in case you need medical attention, etc... but as far as usage goes, I'm 99% data. Dropping down to roaming data speeds does not a fun experience make.

It's plenty fast for GPS, obviously, but VOIP might be dicey if you're out in the boonies.

Re:Pay-you-go

[h4rr4r]

I use data a lot, but generally only when I am in civilization. Otherwise sprints data roaming is fast enough to use google maps to get me back to civilization.

Re:Pay-you-go

[afidel]

I roam at 3G to VZW using my Sprint EVO Shift, some people have reported that you used to only be able to roam at 1xRTT speeds but I've normally seen EVDO.

Re:Pay-you-go

[afidel]

VoIP has *always* been dicey over cellular networks due to high latency and jitter.

Re:Pay-you-go

[Creepy]

A family data plan would be great for me - we're lucky if we use 100k a month between us except when we're out of town (that's when I've racked up 1GB+ before). I've watched Dish and Netflix on my phone, but it seems when I do I am almost always near WiFi, so that doesn't chew up bandwidth. Only 24k so far this month with 10 days to go. I guess I'm in the same boat as the article writer - I rarely use my bandwidth as it is, but have some spike bandwidth on vacation.

Also the rumor is existing customers can keep their unlimited plan (also mentioned in TFA). The article makes it sound like potentially forever, but the rumors I've heard from other sources were more grim (like a possible phase-out by the end of the year).

Re:Pay-you-go

[McGuirk]

3G is unlimited on phones, capped to 5Gb on aircards (with fucking ungodly overages. I went over by 2.2 GB and my bill was 500 Dollars. I cancelled my aircard that day. They refunded the fee, I cancelled anyway).

4G is currently unlimited for both phones and aircards. However, when I signed up for my aircard 3-4 years ago, 3G was unlimited as well.

Still, I find them the current holder of the "Least Shitty Mobile Carrier" belt, so I'll be switching from AT&T to Sprint here in a month or two.

Re:Pay-you-go

[Local ID10T]

They have improved a lot. I have several friends who have made the jump, with no complaints. I do notice that there are places we go where they have no service, but my Verizon phone still has a solid signal.

YMMV

Re:Pay-you-go

[shadowfaxcrx]

Wonder if they'll capitalize on Verizon's stupidity, or if they'll follow them and start limiting phones as well. Either way, if it's unlimited now that's good enough for me. Now I just have to decide between the Evo and the Samsung. Leaning toward Evo because of bad experiences I've had previously with Samsung mobile products.

And They'll Encourage Tethering

[WrongSizeGlass]

pricing, starting at 2 GB for $30/month and going up to 10 GB for $80/month.

With prices like that I bet they start encouraging tethering (or maybe even give it away for free). The overage penalties are high so the 10GB will actually appeal to some. Will they let victims, er, users change their plans on a monthly basis?

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[garcia]

RTFA:

Adding tethering gives an additional $2 GB and an additional $20. So for example, 4 GB with tethering will cost $50/month. Additional data will cost $10/GB.

They're not giving it away for free.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[WrongSizeGlass]

From the Droid-Life article:

Data plans w/ tethering:
4GB – $50/month
7GB – $70/month
12GB – $100/month

If you go over your purchased amount of data, it will cost you $10 per 1GB.

I can't call that encouraging tethering ... yikes!

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[poetmatt]

Don't forget the best part:

If you under use your plan, it doesn't carry over. Have a 12GB plan, use 3GB one month and 13GB the next? You just paid an extra $10.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[Anonymous Coward]

Charging for tethering reminds me of when ISP's tried limiting the number of computers per activated line. "Oh, you have a NAT router and three unauthorized PCs? Sorry, that's not allowed."

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[errandum]

The funny thing is, from what I see, most of the world (with the exception of Australia and maybe Canada) has been moving towards unlimited data plans everywhere. The USA are the ones regressing.

There is too much lobbying by people with big pockets and, in the end, the only one losing is the final consumer. Sigh.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[tlhIngan]

The funny thing is, from what I see, most of the world (with the exception of Australia and maybe Canada) has been moving towards unlimited data plans everywhere. The USA are the ones regressing.

There is too much lobbying by people with big pockets and, in the end, the only one losing is the final consumer. Sigh.

Canada moving to unlimited data plans? The only one I've seen right now is by mobilicity, so if you can put up with shitty 3G and shitty coverage, then yes, it's unlimited. (Not being near a Mobilicity "zone", I can't vouch for it, but I'm told their data speeds are horrifically slow).

No, the big carriers here with large coverage have always been limited. Sometimes they'll run specials where you can get a contract for 5GB/$50, otherwise it'll be 2GB/$50 and the like.

And hell, even our regular broadband is limited more. 250GB/month? A luxury with plans only going up to 100GB.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[brainzach]

With prices like that I bet they start encouraging tethering (or maybe even give it away for free).

Why would carriers charge $40 for 3GB when they can charge $30 for 600MB?

Carriers base their pricing models on what the amount of data the average user uses.

The goal of the overages is to prevent people from using too much data rather than gouging customers money. If you are using 5GB a month, Verizon would be just as happy if you used your wifi as if you paid for the overages. Their best customers are those who pay the $30 and use little data.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone give me a fucking assault rifle. They're legal in the US, you know.

That way I can start taking out the suit-wearing criminals that the government continues to ignore and encourage.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[ideaz]

Fear not 'cause in the USA, if you ain't competent enough for the competition, you buy the competition.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[GooberToo]

Hate to tell you this, but its unofficially called bribing. Bribing has been legalized by SCOTUS and the law now protects the identity of those who bribe. Legally, all we are entitled to know is that our officials have been bribed but we can not know by who or for what. If you don't understand why bribing has literally been legalized, you're not a good citizen. The really sad part is, this isn't hyperbole.

Sigh is an understatement.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[Anonymous Coward]

I despise Verizon for exactly this kind of crap. It's not like you have any reasonably easy way of telling how much data you used. Don't want to go over? Well, you have to pay extra for that 'feature' that stops it from going over.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[operator_error]

Who in the U.S. has an affordable wireless data plan? Data-only is most-desirable, I think. But I live in Northern Arizona and my wireless carrier options seem dismal, at least if I expect a radio signal to support me in the greater Prescott Metropolitan area. (Prescott is no tiny village btw.)

T-mobile used to have a $40 monthly unlimited data-only plan (possibly with caps.) But this seems like ancient history, and I can't find it anymore.

And don't get my started on the subsidized packages, grrrr. You can pry away my open Nokia linux N900 (with dead-simple tethering) when you....

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[slapout]

Actually there's an Android app that tells you how much you've used so far.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[Creepy]

Seems easy enough for me...

On my Android DroidX
Open phone
Go to My Verizon Mobile app
Look at...
Phone Usage, Text Message Usage, Data Usage

If green, you are under the limit
If yellow, you are at the limit
If red, you are past the limit
If red/green colorblind (as one of my friends is), you have to read the numbers

My grudge is I'd prefer not to have to ever have to look at it for anything. Wireless in particular I feel gouges customers whenever and wherever they can. $30 a month for unlimited, restrictive (i.e. tethering costs another $20/month and as I recall is per device) wireless broadband is silly. If texting was $5 per month I'd consider it, but at $30/month (family plan) I think it's absurd. I actually request people set up their SMS/MMS to send to my email and I send messages back using my data package. The rest is identical to texting - it pings me when I get an email. Texting is a ridiculous overpriced easily replaced feature.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[poetmatt]

hell yes they gouge. How much is a wired internet connection in comparison? $30-50 a month for 250GB, and we're talking $100/month for 12GB. While it's wireless and requires different (more) equipment, it's not drastically more expensive than cable as far as installations go.

Or have people forgotten the "ATT hasn't spent shit on their infrastructure" of last year?

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[errandum]

I said Canada isn't. But most of europe is, for example.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[PoopCat]

moving towards unlimited data plans..

with the exception of .. Canada

Might want to brush up on reading/ comprehension skills there buddo.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[b0bby]

Who in the U.S. has an affordable wireless data plan?

Virgin Mobile, but you'd have to use one of their phones. Or get their MiFi for data. Only if Sprint has good coverage where you are.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[mldi]

The funny thing is, from what I see, most of the world (with the exception of Australia and maybe Canada) has been moving towards unlimited data plans everywhere. The USA are the ones regressing.

There is too much lobbying by people with big pockets and, in the end, the only one losing is the final consumer. Sigh.

Well, to be fair, you can only pack so much into radio waves. You can't just decide to add more cable or something. So, it really depends how many people you're serving and how much bandwidth you have available on whether or not you really even need to consider it.

So, it might be a lot easier for a provider to offer truly unlimited data over the airwaves if they're serving a smaller European country for example. It's tough to compare this kind of thing between countries.

The 2GB cap however is nothing short of a money grab. Listening to Pandora at work will put you over that, and it's designed to grab that extra $10 out of a good portion of their customers.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[cyberstealth1024]

Someone give me a fucking assault rifle. They're legal in the US, you know.

That way I can start taking out the suit-wearing criminals that the government continues to ignore and encourage.

Go down to the dock. At Pier 76A-4, there's a blue CONEX box labeled Offshore Shipping Associates, Inc. with serial 2840203821174018. It's unlocked. Open it up. It's loaded with assault weapons and ammo. Take no more than 2 weapons and 12 magazines -- if you take any more, I will hunt you down, Mr. Anonymous Coward. When you leave, crate everything back up and close the CONEX box...make it look like you were never there. I will expect you to reimburse me through my Swiss bank account. I'll send you a bill and routing information through a different channel at a later date.

Also, avoid Customs and Homeland Security at all costs -- they will shoot first and ask questions later. These guys will shoot to kill, especially if you are in possession of assault weapons.

Good luck.

LEGAL DISCLAIMER: Enjoy the humor. Everything in this post is fictitious. Any resemblances to anything real is purely coincidental. IANAL and IANAAD (arms dealer)

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[drsmithy]

The funny thing is, from what I see, most of the world (with the exception of Australia and maybe Canada) has been moving towards unlimited data plans everywhere. The USA are the ones regressing.

Compare the relevant land areas and population densities and you might see a possible reason for the higher costs.

Re:And They'll Encourage Tethering

[brainzach]

pricing, starting at 2 GB for $30/month and going up to 10 GB for $80/month.

With prices like that I bet they start encouraging tethering (or maybe even give it away for free). The overage penalties are high so the 10GB will actually appeal to some. Will they let victims, er, users change their plans on a monthly basis?

The ideal situation for phone companies is to charge for 10 GB a month, while the customer uses none of that.

The overage fees aren't that high. If you are only using 6 GB a month, you will save money using the 2 GB plan over the 10 GB plan. You break even at 7GB or 8GB a month depending on whether you compare to the 2 GB or 5 GB data plans

Unless you can reliably estimate that you can use 9 to 10 GB a month, the 10 GB plan is not economical. Phone companies are just using it as a way to convince its customers to pay for more coverage than they need.

Questions ...

[eldavojohn]

From the article:

Nice spin, eh? Here's an idea, Verizon. If you want to "tailor" things to our unique needs, how about going all the way. If we're paying $30 for 2 GB, how about you refund us $15 for any month we use less than 1 GB? If bytes are the commodity you're making them out to be, that sounds fair to me. Alternatively, give us 'roll-over' data.

Uhhh, why stop there? Why doesn't everyone just pay for what they use? My electricity company is totally cool with charging me at the end of the month for a very specific usage figure ... and you know what? I've never complained about or felt like I was getting the raw end of a deal. There could be a set of people that would actually pay more in this scenario but at least the charges would feel justified (I don't even know if I would be in that set).

And also, now that I've just recently signed myself up for your standard two year have-me-by-the-balls-via-smartphone-subsidy "plan" ... what of my preconception that I will have unlimited data? I'm sure somewhere in the depths of the weighty tome that I signed for you has some fine print about how not only can you alter our agreement but you can also rape me with a pineapple in front of my wife and children. Could you at least grandfather us in though? I did make an agreement and purchase on that assumption.

Re:Questions ...

[garcia]

My electricity company is totally cool with charging me at the end of the month for a very specific usage figure ... and you know what? I've never complained about or felt like I was getting the raw end of a deal.

Because the electricity delivery industry (as well as many utilities) are closely controlled by the government and sometimes even require special permission to raise rates.

Mobile phone companies don't fall under those same guidelines and thus they're going to charge you how they want to charge you. I have a feeling that with the current administration and the rest of those in office, more government regulation isn't going to happen in the foreseeable future.

Re:Questions ...

[Anonymous Coward]

In that agreement there's a clause that lets you leave if they alter the deal (pray they do not alter it any further).

Re:Questions ...

[edmicman]

I'm pretty sure they've always grandfathered plan changes like this...if you have unlimited now you should have it for the duration of the contract. It sounded like it was up in the air as to whether if you renew a grandfathered contract you would continue to have unlimited data or not, but I guess we'll see. Hopefully there are some good controls to measure your data usage and projections.

Re:Questions ...

[SirGeek]

Why ? Because people had been sold "Unlimited Plans" which mean unlimited. Its not the end users' fault if they oversold their network or "oversold" the network.

If I paid for unlimited electricity and found it being metered, I'd be pissed.

If you have an active contract for unlimited, and they're defaulting, ask a lawyer about it. They would be in breech of contract at that point and you could (potentially) sue for damages.

Re:Questions ...

[Anonymous Coward]

not sure about US contracts but we recently went though something similar in the UK with T-Mobile.

they had a unlimited plan with a 1GB fair usage policy. basically it meant it's unlimited but don't take the piss.

they decided to drop ther fair use to 500MB in febuary.

they were forced to back track as in the contract it, while it says they're allowed to change the contract at anytime, if the change is to your material detriment then the contract becomes null and void. they argued that the fair usage policy was seperate to the the contract but buckled under presure.

in the end they brough in the new policy but it only applied to new contracts.

(if you're interested the cheapest contract that 1GB was available on was £10 (currently ~$16) a month with a sim only contract... but you guys don't have sim cards, right?)

Re:Questions ...

[c0nner]

I would be almost okay with a real pay as you use pricing except that I have no faith in the wireless industry to not "make mistakes" in calculating the charges.

At least with the electric company there is a box on the side of the building with a little spinning disk and a count up meter that lets me look and see how much I am using at any time I feel the need. Want to know how crazy that new bandsaw is going to be for your electric bill? No problem. Mark the meter for 5 minutes and see how much power you use normally and then run the saw for 5 minutes and see how much that little disk spins. And when you get a bill from the power company that says you own $1000 when you normally have a $150 bill you can go out and look at the meter to see if there was an error. On the other hand the wireless companies have no such transparency. AT&T customers with iphones have the problem when every they travel where the pay for the international plan and check the meter on the phone to be sure they don't go over their allotment and even if they shut the data off before the meter says they have to they end up coming home to huge bills. When you can't trust the count on the phone and the wireless company's solution is to make you go to a web page to check your usage and when you do it from your phone it is adding to that usage.

Re:Questions ...

[erroneus]

True true. Things have to get much worse before they get better. It took all sorts of stupidity and abuse before Bell got broken up and regulated. After that, things got somewhat better. But since the medium has changed from wired to wireless, the rules no longer apply. (Actually, I think they should apply. The rules put into place were earned by the abusive industry and that same industry should not be allowed to escape the rules simply by shifting the medium.)

Re:Questions ...

[ArsonSmith]

Funny thing is, as a customer, I pay what I want to pay and not a penny more. If their service costs to much I will switch to T-Moble or AT&T. There service sucks? Perhaps Verizon's higher price is worth it. Perhaps I should just go back to a land line. Just because the produce cell phones, doesn't mean they should be required to provide cell phones.

Re:Questions ...

[pixelpusher220]

Why doesn't everyone just pay for what they use? My electricity company is totally cool with charging me at the end of the month for a very specific usage figure

And you know what, they are telling what your 'rate' is, you are allowed to consume an unlimited amount of electricity. Verizon (and most cell companies) is responding to a bandwidth problem with a fixed amount of usage, not a 'rate' of usage.

I don't think anyone would have a problem if Verizon limited your daily bandwidth speed to what their network could actually support. But that wouldn't look good in the marketing proposal.

Re:Questions ...

[wintercolby]

With the break up of Ma Bell and a change of medium, we have gone from a monopoly to an anti-competitive price setting oligopoly. It's much harder to prove collusion than monopoly, so we'll be stuck with this garbage for some time. Instead of competing for our business, they're busy competing for the most inventive way to screw us.

Re:Questions ...

[lobsterGun]

They aren't going to default on existing contracts. They just won't offer unlimited contracts in the future.

Re:Questions ...

[tompaulco]

My electricity company is totally cool with charging me at the end of the month for a very specific usage figure ... and you know what? I've never complained about or felt like I was getting the raw end of a deal.
Well, I for one would be more than happy to go metered as well. Rather than pay $40 for an unlimited amount whether I use it or not, I would happily go to a plan where they charge a reasonable amount per GB and you just pay that. 50 cents a GB seems like a reasonable amount to pay.

Re:Questions ...

[h4rr4r]

T-mobile will not be around much longer. AT&T is more expensive and Sprint will probably grow. I don't even have a landline, nor would I go back to one. I would go without a phone before that. Since they use public easements, get government loans and subsidies they should sell at a reasonable price, or return the tax payers money and buy or lease any piece of land they want to crossover.

Re:Questions ...

[gstoddart]

They aren't going to default on existing contracts.

It's not called 'defaulting' when you can change the TOS on a whim because the contract says you can.

Do you really think there isn't a clause in there that says they can change the definition of 'unlimited' or simply stop offering it to existing customers at their discretion? Those contracts are written in such a way that they can do pretty much anything they like.

Re:Questions ...

[BOUND4DOOM]

Well the big problem and difference here is, your electric company does send huge surges of power to your house and force you to pay for them because someone else thought it was a good idea. Specifically I am referring to advertising. When you go to a majority of pages if you look at the actual data size and what comes through on a page the actual content is minuscule as far as data. However Flash ridden advertisements and JavaScript making call backs to the servers and things is what is chewing up your bandwidth. So why should I pay for advertisers to send me things? First things that going to happens is you are going to see apps being built that actually start refusing connection to advertising sites and blacklisting DNS services to advertisers. I know I will be looking into this because I am not paying for some advertiser to send me adds. I have created massive host files to block advertising servers before and this might actually be a great startup business for someone. Right now you don't care about huge flash ads cause they cost you nothing. Now you have to start paying for them because what would you want your usage spent on ads or the stuff you want. Second, information is power. The more information and data you have at your fingertips the more powerful you can be. What you will see here is Rich getting more powerful because they can afford more data real time. Take a stock broker for example. Getting multiple emails, data on stocks and exchange rates sent to his or her tablet constantly. Powerful tools right there. However, the richer person will now have this access and this data because they can afford it, the poorer person can not.

Re:Questions ...

[travdaddy]

My electricity company is totally cool with charging me at the end of the month for a very specific usage figure ... and you know what? I've never complained about or felt like I was getting the raw end of a deal.

Shhhh!!!!! Don't give the electricity company any ideas!

Re:Questions ...

[brainzach]

Uhhh, why stop there? Why doesn't everyone just pay for what they use? My electricity company is totally cool with charging me at the end of the month for a very specific usage figure ... and you know what? I've never complained about or felt like I was getting the raw end of a deal. There could be a set of people that would actually pay more in this scenario but at least the charges would feel justified (I don't even know if I would be in that set).

It's psychology. People don't want to be worrying about being billed every time they look something up on the Internet, even if it costs less money. It is easier for consumers just to pay one price and never think about the costs of data for another month. The caps are high enough so it creates the illusion of an unlimited data plan for the majority of customers, so it isn't different than the broadband service they receive at home. Being billed per actual usage brings them back to the days of dial up modems.

Re:Questions ...

[vlm]

I don't think anyone would have a problem if Verizon limited your daily bandwidth speed to what their network could actually support. But that wouldn't look good in the marketing proposal.

I disagree, I'd sign right up. I'd much rather get a random and unknown but probably usable download rate with no really horrible worst case scenario, than a random and unknown bill with a worst case scenario of something absolutely crazy like $25K.

I'm a fixed income guy because I have a full time job in tech.. I'm not like one of those retired guys who get COLA raises every year... So I'm not interested in uncontrollably random high bills.

Re:Questions ...

[bws111]

Sprint will probably grow? What are you basing that on? Over the last 3 years they have lost more than 4 million customers. In addition, last year they lost more than 3 billion dollars.

Re:Questions ...

[bws111]

Correct. POTS used to be 'message rate' (pay per minute) based. People absolutely hated it.

Re:Questions ...

[h4rr4r]

The death of T-Mobile will grow Sprint. Those are not customers that will want to be with AT&T. I am leaving Verizon as soon as my contract is up. Between locked bootloaders, ridiculous data pricing and horrible customer service I am done with them.

Re:Questions ...

[SilentStaid]

I know no one RTFA, but at least someone should read their legally binding contracts:

Changes to the Agreement or Charges. except to the extent prohibited by law, if we: (a) increase the charges included in your monthly recurring access rate plan, or (b) modify a material term of our agreement with you and the modification would be materially adverse to you, we will notify you of the increase or modification and you can cancel that service without paying a cancellation fee (which is your only remedy) by following the cancellation instructions in the notice. if you do not cancel your service by following those instructions, or you otherwise accept the change, then you agree to the increase or modification, even if you paid for service in advance. if the notice does not say how long you have to cancel, then it is within 14 days after the date of the notice, unless a longer period is required by law. except to the extent prohibited by law, charges for products, services, optional services, or any other charges that are not included in your monthly recurring access rate plan (such as directory assistance, roaming, downloads, and third-party content) are subject to change at any time without notice, and if you continue to use those services, or you otherwise agree to the changes, then you agree to the new charges. visit our web site, retail locations, or call customer care for current charges.

Re:Questions ...

[DrgnDancer]

One is hopeful that existing subscribers will be able to keep their existing plans until their current contract runs out. That's how AT&T usually does it at any rate. I was actually (pleasantly) shocked recently when we went to replace my wife's iPhone and they told us that she was grandfathered into her unlimited 3G data plan and would keep it with her new phone. I imagine that whenever a "4G" iPhone comes out we'll be herded like good little cattle to buy a "limited" 4G plan along with the new phone, but apparently as long as we stick with 3G we get to keep our unlimitedness.

One a side note, those prices sound absolutely awful compared to the competition. I think the 4 gig capped AT&T plan is $30 a month, ig you're not grandfathered into the unlimited plan, that's twice what Sprint is offering for the same price. I want to say that the cheap 2 gig capped plan is only $15 or $20 a month with AT&T.

Re:Questions ...

[spidrw]

Too bad Verizon (like all other providers) has a binding arbitration clause in the agreement. The BBB will be the only group they answer to. Either way, I'm pretty sure this change is only going-forward. Renew now!

Re:Questions ...

[AndyAndyAndyAndy]

Check your contract terms - If Verizon alters the terms of the agreement mid-cycle, you have the right to terminate the deal without fee or penalty.

Re:Questions ...

[skiman1979]

Just to be safe, I think I may just let my contract expire and continue on with my unlimited data... Well, that is until my phone dies and I need a new one. Even then, I might be better off buying a new device at retail.

Re:Questions ...

[DrgnDancer]

Yeah, we still use SIM cards. Most people chose to sign contracts for severe discounts on new phones, but there's no legal or technological reason to do so. We just sent my dad my wife's old iPhone 3G, and he popped the SIM out of his (dying) flip-phone and stuck into the iPhone. Works fine. He was going to sign a contract for a new iPhone or Android, but he didn't want to buy a data plan until he had a better idea what his personal use case would be for the device. So now he has an older iPhone, but doesn't have to get a data plan.

The reason most people chose to sign contracts and get new phones every couple of years here isn't that we don't have SIMs or can't switch phones arbitrarily if we chose. It's that we get charged the same amount whether the phone company subsidizes our phone purchases or not. There's no "SIM only" rates. If I'm going to have to pay $x a month regardless of whether I'm using the subsidy, I may as well use it and get my money's worth. I'm paying for the subsidy either way, it's just whether I use it or not.

Re:Questions ...

[TheCRAIGGERS]

Keep in mind too that not everything you sign in those agreements will hold up in court. I believe those forced-arbitration clauses have been successfully fought against in court. Granted, you have to be fairly wealthy and/or be very pissed at them to pay the various lawyering fees.

Re:Questions ...

[gstoddart]

Keep in mind too that not everything you sign in those agreements will hold up in court. I believe those forced-arbitration clauses have been successfully fought against in court.

Well, except for the fact that SCOTUS actually allowed forced arbitration fairly recently.

So, you may have less recourse than you might think. I'm not 100% sure of the scope of it, but at least some aspects of it have been upheld.

Re:Questions ...

[Lemmeoutada Collecti]

No sir, we did notify you that your rate plans were now going to double and include a free gynecological examination of the female users of your family plan. The notice was posted to your phone the first of last month. Just go to Settings -> About Phone -> Software Version -> Intraorifice Updates -> Rates -> Basic and Enhanced Network Devices -> Open Version Enhancement Reader -> Analysis. If you scroll to page five, paragraph 21 subsection S clearly explains the changes.

Yes sir, I understand that you don't speak Spanish, which is why the information was posted to your phone in Linear-A.

Yes sir, I can certainly adjust your bill for the month, would you like the anterior or posterior adjustment inserted?

Re:Questions ...

[Anonymous Coward]

50 cents a GB seems like a reasonable amount to pay

Good Lord!

Does $25 for a banana sound reasonable to you, too? Or $20,000 for a TV set?

Re:Questions ...

[jonamous]

50 cents/gb seems extremely cheap. I use data constantly and haven't gone over 2gb. Do you think VZW would really go for charging me $1 instead of the 30 or 40 bucks they are charging now?

Re:Questions ...

[AJH16]

My understanding was that the new rates only apply to new contracts. You are grandfathered in to unlimited under your current contract terms, just beware the next time you get an upgrade or make any changes that require changing your contract.

Re:Questions ...

[lightknight]

It would have been cheap ten years ago. Now, it's severely overpriced.

Basically, it's gouging the customer, and will probably result in a massive increase in contract defaults when customers start going over the limit.

Basically, whoever came up with this scheme needs to be fired and forgotten. It's ill-fated, and it's a short-term gain, long-term loss. Like selling stock in Berkshire Hathaway to pay the monthly rent: it's a bad deal.

Re:Questions ...

[Anonymous Coward]

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2253808&cid=36516276

Re:Questions ...

[amRadioHed]

T-Mobile has SIM only rates. I'm sure it won't survive the merger though.

Re:Questions ...

[smithmc]

Uhhh, why stop there? Why doesn't everyone just pay for what they use? My electricity company is totally cool with charging me at the end of the month for a very specific usage figure ... and you know what? I've never complained about or felt like I was getting the raw end of a deal.

This has probably been answered a dozen times already, but... electricity has an intrinsic cost to produce and transmit. Every kWh of electricity produced and delivered requires a certain amount of energy, thus fuel. These costs represent the bulk of the monthly price you pay. Data is not electricity, however. Sending a million bytes doesn't cost much more than sending one byte. Most of the costs, at least currently, come from building out infrastructure to keep up with customer demand. More routers, switches, fibers, etc. These costs map more closely to per-customer than they do to per-gigabyte. However, the biggest users do place more of a load on, and need for, that infrastructure than the normal user. So, IMO, the appropriate pricing scheme would in fact be something like what there is now, i.e. $X per month for Y GB baseline, plus an extra $Z per month per extra GB. Of course, that leaves the question of how appropriate the current values of X, Y, and Z are...

Re:Questions ...

[Glendale2x]

Funny thing is, as a customer, I pay what I want to pay and not a penny more. If their service costs to much I will switch to T-Moble or AT&T

I think you meant to say AT&T or AT&T.

Ring-Ring...

[secretplans]

Cell phones give you cancer!!!

Re:Ring-Ring...

[WrongSizeGlass]

Cell phones give you cancer!!!

And these types of pricing plans give you poverty. which one do you think will do Verizon users in first?

Re:Ring-Ring...

[secretplans]

Fortunately for me, my poverty saves me from the cell phone cancer. But I detest the multi-billion dollar mega corporate telecommunications dudes, so... Cell phones give you AIDS!!!

Re:Ring-Ring...

[tompaulco]

Cell phones give you cancer!!!
No, they give you high blood pressure and anxiety.

Re:Ring-Ring...

[Anonymous Coward]

Cell phones give you AIDS!!!

Hint: you are doing something wrong

Re:Ring-Ring...

[ArsonSmith]

but then you'll qualify for medicaid to treat the cancer.

win-win situation.

Text messaging

[cultiv8]

At least they're not getting rid of the unlimited text messaging plan, I just might go over my data quota

Re:Text messaging

[FredFredrickson]

That's the new protocol. HTTP over SMS. It's going to be a hard winter this year.

Re:Text messaging

[nschubach]

"Your webpage, 160 characters at a time."

Meh

[Mr_eX9]

2GB is plenty for me. The most mobile data I've ever used in a month is a gig, which included heavy 3rd party tethering use. I usually use 500-700MB. Maybe 4G LTE speeds will change my usage, but I doubt it will more than *double* my usage.

I understand that won't be enough for some people, but with apps like Llama https://market.android.com/details?id=com.kebab.Llama it's really easy to set up location profiles that turn wi-fi on and off at places you trust. If that still doesn't sate your usage needs, get your workplace to pay for it or *gasp* put your damn phone away and interact with the real world.

Re:Meh

[garcia]

I'm not a VZW subscriber (I have AT&T unlimited data) but just with regular use alone I'm bumping up close to 2GB monthly (just e-mail, web, and social media use).

That said, I can burn through 2GB in a day in an airport watching Netflix over 3G. Hell, I've burned through half of that on the Stairmaster doing the same.

The bandwidth caps are entirely too low especially as the carriers roll out bigger pipes to the devices. This is nothing more than a money making venture for them (much like GSM networks charging for SMS) and it needs to be stopped by the people voting w/their feet to some new startup carrier that is smart enough to buck the trends.

Re:Meh

[queazocotal]

2 gig isn't a hell of a lot when tethering.
Especially if you're using it for your primary internet.
That's a whole 60MB/day.

I am having trouble sticking to 30M/day - and that's using opera with 'turbo' mode on to compress text, and turning off images for most websites.
Not to mention that one several minute video eats your days quota, and a movie eats the whole thing.

Re:Meh

[wintercolby]

I am a VZW subscriber, for a little while longer. Once my current contract runs out and I'm forced into the 5GB cap, I won't be any longer. Verizon used to be reliable. My wife and I have a new joke: "Can you drop me now? . . . DROID!" Strangely enough the Ntelos/US Cellular/small carrier network/market covers more area around me than Verizon does. Now if they could only get decent phones.

Re:Meh

[Mr_eX9]

But, clearly, Verizon either doesn't want you to use your data connection like that, or they want you to pay out the ass for the privilege. I think it's very backward that they're doing this, but it's not going to make me switch to another provider since the major telcos are all doing the same thing.

Re:Meh

[bws111]

So the carriers are "rolling out bigger pipes", and somehow that means you should not have to pay more? Please explain that logic. The bigger pipes are for your (not the carriers) benefit. If you are requiring bigger pipes, you should be expected to pay for it.

Re:Meh

[garcia]

Strangely enough my home Internet connections haven't risen significantly in price since 1998 when I got my first my first DSL modem yet my bandwidth is 30x faster.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

...it needs to be stopped by the people voting w/their feet to some new startup carrier that is smart enough to buck the trends.

It doesn't need to be a startup carrier - I just signed up with Sprint - got the new Overdrive Pro 4G hotspot (decent little device). Sprint's got a data plan that's $45 (actually about $46.50 after fees) that gives you truly unlimited data usage one the 4G network, and 3GB/mo on the 3G network. You have to make sure to specifically ask for it, or the salestards will sign you up with the $60 plan that's identical except with a 5GB cap on the 3G network Granted it only works for me because I live, travel, and work in an area that's pretty well blanketed by Sprint's (or Clearwire's) 4G network - but their coverage has been continuously expanding/improving. Oppose this to AT&T/Verizon, where AT&T decides to buy up T-mobile instead of actually building out their infrastructure, and Verizon decides to charge an arm and a leg for weaker/sparser 4G coverage.

With all the absurd hidden fees/taxes that have been mounting on my Verizon FIOS (for home) account, I'll probably be dropping it completely in the next month or two. Sure, going from FIOS 25/15 speeds to Sprint's 6/0.5 (god-awful upload speeds on average) for my home connection will take some adjusting - but for the $150/mo the FIOS (3-in-1) package is costing it'll probably be worth it.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

So you use on order of 5 times the amount of data per month than I do, but you somehow think we should pay the same amount and that i should be making up the difference because i use less data per month? Yeah, that sounds great for you and the other 10% of people who use more than a few GB every month, but what about the other 90% of us who use much less? I am paying $30-$40 a month because of people like you. You want the convenience of being able to watch streaming Netflix wherever you are, but you are not willing to pay extra for that added service? Screw you commie!

Re:Meh

[Kumiorava]

I think the problem with these charges is that they are not even close to what it costs for a carrier to deliver 1GB. You don't pay $30-40 a month because of people who use 10GB per month or even 100GB per month. You pay that amount because of the carrier is greedy to subsidize other failed investments and/or extra dividends with the data fees. Or maybe they are just incompetent and the operations truly costs that much.

Amazon can sell 1 GB of data transfer for less than $0.15, even if we double that cost it's nowhere near the fees charged. With double of Amazon prices the carrier could transfer 100GB for $30. The cell towers needs to be built anyway for the coverage and the base cost of cell tower coverage is charged already on your regular phone bill.

I'm living in Finland and here the data transfer over cellular network is truly unlimited, tethering doesn't cost extra and speeds are up to 14mbit/sec. The cost for this connection is right now 13 EUR/month. On the other hand 10/10 fiber ethernet purchased by HOA for every unit in the building costs 6.80 EUR per apartment with 100/10 upgrade after 2 year contract period. Individually 10/10 fiber with IPTV costs 19 EUR/month.

I'm telling these costs as an example of true cost of delivering 1 GB over cellular or fiber network. If it would cost more than fraction of cent these companies would be out of business and right now they are in fact profitable. Even if you count in higher US wages, more difficult environment to build networks, and regulatory hurdles the true cost of gigabyte cannot be nowhere near what Verizon is charging.

Re:Meh

[ajs]

I'm not a VZW subscriber (I have AT&T unlimited data) but just with regular use alone I'm bumping up close to 2GB monthly (just e-mail, web, and social media use).

That said, I can burn through 2GB in a day in an airport watching Netflix over 3G. Hell, I've burned through half of that on the Stairmaster doing the same.

The bandwidth caps are entirely too low especially as the carriers roll out bigger pipes to the devices. This is nothing more than a money making venture for them (much like GSM networks charging for SMS) and it needs to be stopped by the people voting w/their feet to some new startup carrier that is smart enough to buck the trends.

Here's the problem from VZW's perspective: the usage you just pointed out is rare, right now, and completely new in terms of how their network gets used (e.g. movies). So, what should they do when usage, and thus costs start to go up? Just raise rates to pay for the extra towers and upstream bandwidth? Sure, they can do that, but joe average who just wants a way to phone, text and occasionally check email is probably not going to be able to justify the extra expense when his plan goes up dramatically.

So, what they're trying to do is create tiers, within which similar usage patterns pay for each other.

To my mind, the problems are: 1) There needs to be a tier with truly unlimited usage at the top so that that app I installed which gets far greedier than I thought it would, doesn't cost me a few thousand! 2) These companies need to start truly competing which each other in order to balance against the temptation to increase margins with every plan change, which I think is going to require opening up more spectrum to more players. The feds have to get involved in that last item. I also think that mergers (including T-Mobil) should require forfeiting most of the spectrum owned by the smaller of the two companies, to be divided up among other, smaller players in the market. Why? Because otherwise encouraging competition only feeds the merger-mill.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that a startup "carrier" will be buying time off one of the big boy's towers, paying their fees for SMS "handling" or wtf ever the actual carrier wants to call it.

Unless you mean a startup that wants to acquire frequency and build towers.. across the whole country. Which.. might just be a bit more expensive than a new, smart startup can afford.

Re:Meh

[Anonymous Coward]

How exactly do you think network performance is supposed to improve? If the company can just charge you more instead of upgrading their network, what do you get? nothing

Contracts about up any how.

[Kenja]

I dont really mind tiered pricing, but I do mind having my data plan change without options. So guess I'll be moving on to another carrier.

Re:Contracts about up any how.

[nomadic]

I do mind having my data plan change without options. So guess I'll be moving on to another carrier.

Isn't that an option?

Re:Contracts about up any how.

[cforciea]

Less so as the years go by and carriers consolidate. If he needs any chance at rural coverage at all, his alternatives after T-Mobile gets bought are AT&T and Sprint?

Re:Contracts about up any how.

[necro81]

So guess I'll be moving on to another carrier.

Who to? At this point all the U.S. carriers have capped data plans that cost (gouge) more or less the same. Time goes on and you get less for paying more no matter who you are with (I'm looking at you: $0.20 per SMS). It almost as though they are in collusion! But that's ridiculous - everyone knows that capitalism and competition invariably leads to a consumer's utopia.

Re:Contracts about up any how.

[Junta]

I might have forgiven the tiering, but the new bottom tier is no cheaper than the older 'unlimited' tier.

Re:Contracts about up any how.

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you seen the cancellation fees?

Re:Contracts about up any how.

[Anonymous Coward]

It almost as though they are in collusion! But that's ridiculous - everyone knows that capitalism and competition invariably leads to a consumer's utopia

Sigh. As covered many, many times over. The cellular/telco networks are nowhere near free market capitalism. For one thing, the FCC is involved in all radio communications so getting access to carrier bands that allow you to make a startup is one major restriction to market.

Re:Contracts about up any how.

[tycoex]

While I agree that the amount of collusion going on between cell companies is ridiculous, you're forgetting about Sprint.

I know their coverage might not be good for everyone, but it's definitely worth a shot to look at the map and see if it works for you. For a plan with minimal landline minutes, unlimited mobile minutes, unlimited text, and unlimited (minus tethering) data, Sprint was about 30 dollars a month cheaper for 2 lines than Verizon would have been. And that's before this price change.

Re:Contracts about up any how.

[cos(0)]

I've said it in the thread about cramming, I'll repeat it here: prepaid. I don't understand why Americans underappreciate prepaid, with such wonderful options like Virgin Mobile and Boost. I pay $25/mo (total) for unlimited (realistically 2.5 gigabytes/mo) data, unlimited SMS, and 300 minutes per month.

Here's a thread from earlier: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2254224&cid=36506886

okay but not awesome (also not terrible)

[jcombel]

if they had a sub-1GB plan for less money, i would be pretty excited

as it stands, AT&T's 200MB plan is still the best value for the majority of cellular data users, even compared to unlimited plans

Re:okay but not awesome (also not terrible)

[gad_zuki!]

T-mobile has a 200mb plan too. I'm on it. So far its okay. I'm on wifi 90% of the time anyway. Costs about the same as AT&T but the big benefit is that I'm not on AT&T. *shudder*

Re:okay but not awesome (also not terrible)

[MacGyver2210]

200MB would be the best plan for the majority...if the majority of people could consume less than 200MB of data. I use more than that just checking my email on my phone.

Seriously, fuck cell phone companies. Don't give them an inch, as they've already taken a mile and are eying up the rest of the superhighway.

Re:okay but not awesome (also not terrible)

[Jon_S]

I have been sticking to an old winmobile kinda-smart phone grandfathered in for no data plan. I just can't see spending $30/mo. for a data plan when I can get most of what I need from wifi. But it's old and clunky, and I can never upgrade without agreeing to a data plan.

But when I heard the rumor that VZW was going to tiered plans, I started browsing upgrades, figuring I'd break down and pay, say, $15 for a 200 MB plan or whatever and continue to use mostly wifi for data.

Well, I guess I can stop doing that. The lowest price tier is the same as the current highest-price tier.

If VZW wasn't the only carrier I can get when I am out in the woods, I would drop them like a lead balloon.

Re:okay but not awesome (also not terrible)

[Jon_S]

Well, I had RTFA, but I hadn't CTFL (clicked all the friendly links) on the friendly article page. Clicking this link gives a leaked screen shot saying:

"New $15/150MB Data Package for Feature Phone and 3G Smartphones"

So maybe I can go back to shopping for an upgrade after all!

Re:okay but not awesome (also not terrible)

[afidel]

No, the best plan is Virgin Mobile (Sprint), $25/month 300 minutes, unlimited data, unlimited texts, no additional fees except local taxes. It doesn't allow roaming though so if you don't have good Sprint coverage where you live it obviously won't work for you but they cover like 80% of the US population so it should work for most people.

Re:okay but not awesome (also not terrible)

[jcombel]

check the link i posted. the majority of people do consume less than 200MB of data.

personally i peak out at about 150MB on cellular and 1GB on wifi (according to NetSentry.
 
that 150MB is google maps for turn-by-turn GPS and pandora while driving (about an hour a day) and various web.
 
i can't imagine what emails i could get on my cell phone that would add up to 200MB/month. even if i could - them's the breaks. like it or not, it costs more to do more; i would probably just bill work for the extra data plan if i needed it.

Re:okay but not awesome (also not terrible)

[jcombel]

you're right, that is a sweet deal. after a rocky ride with t-mobile (their coverage area, not their service), i got in the habit of only thinking of ATT/VZW/sprint. but virgin mobile does get access in tons of places with the sprint network, so that is a pretty good value

Tethering, bah.

[getto man d]

If I'm going to pay for a capped connection that rarely meets advertised speeds why the hell should I pay extra for tethering? I don't understand how explicitly defining a cap for myself justifies the extra cost to use a device either than a phone.
I do have a droid with unlimited but I'm seriously contemplating dropping any kind of smart phone whatsoever; I just don't see the value anymore.

Re:Tethering, bah.

[Richard_at_work]

This comes up every time....

Data usage on a mobile phone produces different usage patterns than usage on a regular PC.

So while the same data cap applies, the tethered device can put a higher demand on the network. That is what the tethering charge is for.

Re:Tethering, bah.

[FredFredrickson]

I have to disagree with you there. If I can use netflix on my phone and google on my tethered laptop, I fail to see why I have to pay extra to use my alloted transfer.

Re:Tethering, bah.

[Anonymous Coward]

And what''s the difference between tethering to a phone and using a mini with its own internal cell modem on the same fucking network without the additional charge!?

Re:Tethering, bah.

[MogNuts]

I did the same thing. Just did it. Was switching carriers. Had an iPhone. Was going to get a new 4G Android phone because I hate latency (4G is almost at local wireless router latency times) and slow download speed. 4G is the one truly useful feature to come out since the smartphone. But anyway, I thought about it for a few weeks. I read online journals, text, and call on my smartphone. On the rare occasion I use Google Maps. Coming from using computers since '92-93, nothing is more refreshing than using crappy, slim-featured, buggy apps on a small screen and then going back to a nice 22" monitor on a desktop with a great designed mouse and mechanical keyboard. Aaah.

So I said u know what, f* it. I'd rather just use a desktop when I need it, or not use a computer at all. If I need to kill time, I'll bring a magazine or book (I know! Heh crazy right? :-) ). Besides, even though I love reading them for 30 min in the morning everyday, most tech news sites are just garbage. I'm probably better off.

The only exception is Pandora. That's freakin awesome. But since I get no cell reception in my gym anyway, I'd need a mp3 with local storage anyway, so might as well just get a cheapo mp3 player for the few hours in a week I need it. Why get a smartphone and the associated extra $360/year it entails.

Re:Tethering, bah.

[Richard_at_work]

Uhm, for the reason I gave... usage patterns on regular PCs are heavier than usage patterns on mobile devices?

Its not just about "I can stream Netflix, so why can I....", its that people tend to not just do one thing on a regular PC - I have some torrents going, I'm listening to some streamed internet radio, I have two files downloading, I have 10 tabs open in Safari, my PC might be downloading updates etc etc etc.

Re:Tethering, bah.

[pixelpusher220]

I pay for a usage rate, not 'what' to use it on. I agree that usage likely increases with tethering - that means they need to better control what 'rates' they are offering.

This issue here is network over saturation, the only way you solve that is reducing the 'rate' at which people are using data.

Data 'caps' only guarantee that for the first 2 weeks of a billing cycle, the network still sucks and the last 2 weeks it's a ghost town. That's terrible usage management.

Re:Tethering, bah.

[pixelpusher220]

What I forgot to explicitly add is that if my 'rate' is limited to a network reasonable amount, then it won't matter at all what I use to consume that 'rate'.

If I'm tethering my 'rate' is still the same as when I'm not and I don't see any difference in usability. That would seem to be a 'positive' experience for the consumer, not this "hey your bill is $600 because you watched 6 movies we pushed relentlessly via advertising".

Re:Tethering, bah.

[Anonymous Coward]

What you're (apparently unknowingly) suggesting is that they divide the total bandwidth evenly between all of the customers using any given tower. I highly doubt that you would enjoy that.

Re:Tethering, bah.

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Data usage on a mobile phone produces different usage patterns than usage on a regular PC.

This sounds like it matters, but it doesn't. If you're paying to get 5 gigs of data, you should get five gigs of data.

I'd agree with you if we were discussing unlimited plans.

Re:Tethering, bah.

[tomz16]

The billing cycle is evenly distributed on verizon wireless (I suspect it had something to do with paper billing)... Mine starts on the 8th of the month.

Re:Tethering, bah.

[pixelpusher220]

That probably does mitigate the issue somewhat. It doesn't change that they are trying to solve a rate issue with a total amount solution :)

Re:Tethering, bah.

[pixelpusher220]

And another thought. By going to these metered plans, they are quite clearly violating the 'rates' they are selling you. You can't say "4G speeds!" without diving the 'cap' by one month. That's your 'actual' rate and far far below what they are claiming they provide you.

And to totally abuse the car analogy - Kinda like saying "This car can go 200 mph and 600 miles per tank! But you only get 6 gallons a month included. Any more and you pay per teaspoon."

Re:Tethering, bah.

[Tetsujin]

This comes up every time....

Data usage on a mobile phone produces different usage patterns than usage on a regular PC.

So while the same data cap applies, the tethered device can put a higher demand on the network. That is what the tethering charge is for.

Bullshit. The tethering charge is there so they can make the option of buying a separate, more expensive wireless plan just for your laptop look like an attractive prospect despite the fact that you already have (or had) "unlimited" data via your phone.

Re:Tethering, bah.

[tomz16]

And another thought. By going to these metered plans, they are quite clearly violating the 'rates' they are selling you. You can't say "4G speeds!" without diving the 'cap' by one month. That's your 'actual' rate and far far below what they are claiming they provide you.

Why not!? You most certainly can quote the maxmimum burst speed and the total transfer as two separate quantities (total data cap and maximum data rate). They are two completely unrelated quantities with different units! Every other tiered data provider on the planet does it. (e.g. comcast has a 250GB cap while allowing a maximum rate that would exceed that cap if used continuously.... AT&T has had very similar wireless tiered data pricing for the past year. You can colocate a server on a GigE port with only 1TB of transfer, etc. etc. etc. )

It isn't ambiguous, misleading, or dishonest as long as both quantities are available to the purchaser (i.e. up to 4G LTE speeds when network and wireless conditions allow for it, 2GB maximum transfer per month). Furthermore, a burstable solution serves end users better in most applications. In this case, I'd rather be able to burst to 30mbits when I NEED to load that youtube cat video rather than being rate limited to 6 kilobits per second 24/7 (2 GB / 30 days -> kilobits per second).

What Good is 4G if You Can't Use It?

[Hardhead_7]

I already have a 3G android smartphone. It works just fine for what I need to do on my phone. I get email, I can surf the web, and I can stream music (but I don't go crazy with it). I very rarely use it for watching video. I just checked my usage this month, and I've just now cracked 2GB, about three weeks into my billing cycle. If I'm using this much data now, what happens when I get one of those 4G smartphones that they advertise showing people watching videos on them? If you're to watch those commercials, you'd think they were designed to be portable TVs more than phones. But even with their very hefty plans, you'll get overage pretty quickly pulling that much data down regularly.
My next phone will likely be Sprint, unless they go to a tiered pricing before my next contract is up. I know their 4G isn't as good as Verizon's.... but honestly, I can already stream Youtube video at 3G speeds if I put up with a little buffering, and Sprint's 4G is plenty fast enough to watch good quality video (the only thing I really see me needing 4G for any time in the foreseeable future). And, hey, you can actually USE it!

Re:What Good is 4G if You Can't Use It?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sprint's 4G has terrible coverage. I've had it since day one on both an Epic 4G and and EVO 4G...

I also live in NYC.

Re:What Good is 4G if You Can't Use It?

[mounthood]

Sprint is NOT unlimited:

Voice/Data Usage Limitation: Sprint reserves the right, without notice, to limit throughput speeds, and to deny, terminate, modify, disconnect or suspend service if off-network usage in a month exceeds: (1) voice: 800 min. or a majority of minutes; or (2) data: 300 megabytes or a majority of kilobytes. Prohibited network use rules apply. See in-store materials or sprint.com/termsandconditions for specific prohibited uses.

http://shop.sprint.com/mysprint/shop/plan_details.jsp?tabId=pt_individual_tab&planCatId=pln301001cat&planFamilyType=&flow=AAL&showDetailsTab=true

The website puts it as "Unlimited data (on our network)" not on the internet in general.

Re:What Good is 4G if You Can't Use It?

[Colonel Korn]

Sprint is NOT unlimited:

Voice/Data Usage Limitation: Sprint reserves the right, without notice, to limit throughput speeds, and to deny, terminate, modify, disconnect or suspend service if off-network usage in a month exceeds: (1) voice: 800 min. or a majority of minutes; or (2) data: 300 megabytes or a majority of kilobytes. Prohibited network use rules apply. See in-store materials or sprint.com/termsandconditions for specific prohibited uses.

http://shop.sprint.com/mysprint/shop/plan_details.jsp?tabId=pt_individual_tab&planCatId=pln301001cat&planFamilyType=&flow=AAL&showDetailsTab=true

The website puts it as "Unlimited data (on our network)" not on the internet in general.

Yes, good point, but it's unlimited in practice. They haven't complained when I crack 20 GB in a month, so I think most people will be fine.

Re:What Good is 4G if You Can't Use It?

[keefus_a]

You are misinterpreting that statement. By "on our network" they mean while your phone is connected to the Sprint network and not roaming. It does in fact mean "on the internet in general." As long as you have a Sprint signal anyway.

Pricing!!

[Anonymous Coward]

With how we are laced with charges, and they are spining profits out the wahzoo.. it's like the gas companies saying, "we still need to charge you more!" no reason everything shouldn't be unlimited. they know we need/want it, just like fuel, so they are going to gouge us!

Re:Pricing!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Gas companies turn a 5-8% profit. That's not gouging. They simply do so much in terms of volume that it appears that way.

Oil price speculators on the other hand, do gouge us. The cell phone companies certainly do as well. Of course, if you're using 8-12 GB, then you're probably not using your phone as just a phone, or you have way too much free time.

Re:Pricing!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Exxon made a profit of 2 cents per gallon sold in the US last year.
 
  The companies, however, are just gouging us like the gas companies
 
So.... not at all?
 
  I mean seriously, think about what they draw in monthly, just on base plans alone!
 
Revenue != Profit. I get the feeling that this has more to do with customers who don't use freakishly large amounts of data (like yourself). They are affected by what you use. And believe it or not, building running these towers costs quite a bit of money, and Verizon has a lot of towers. Adding more bandwidth for users like yourself isn't cheap.

Re:Pricing!!

[floop]

That's bullshit and easily checked with a search. US consumed 138.5 billion gallons of gas in 2010. While Exxon Mobile made profits of $30.46 billion on $383 billion in revenue. Why are so many people compelled to be apologists for big business. I bet you believe that rapist really loved you too. I suppose it's possible that they made on $0.02 per gallon and made up the rest on t-shirt sales to corporate fan boys.

Re:Pricing!!

[Anonymous Coward]

I have yet to see the numbers that show more than 2 cents profit per gallon. You're showing overall US gasoline consumption, and Exxon's worldwide profit (they sell outside of the US, you know). Try getting better numbers. It was 2 cents per gallon in the US. Good luck proving me wrong (you won't).

Switch!

[TheNinjaroach]

That's OK, I'll just switch to one of those other carriers providing unlimited wireless data.

Re:Switch!

[AndrewNeo]

So.. Sprint.

Re:Switch!

[Tetsujin]

That's OK, I'll just switch to one of those other carriers providing unlimited wireless data.

Don't forget there's another choice as well: If you don't like the available options, don't get any of them.

Re:Switch!

[Anonymous Coward]

Sprint is unlimited. I wonder if they will be able to capitalize on this or will the fumble the ball as usual.

Glad I Dropped 'Em

[Forthan Red]

Switch from Verison to Sprint several years ago. I get unthrottled, uncapped, unlimited data access for $15 extra, and I can tether my laptop when I'm traveling.

Re:Glad I Dropped 'Em

[OverlordQ]

I get unthrottled, uncapped, unlimited data access for $15 extra, and I can tether my laptop when I'm traveling.

For now.

Re:Glad I Dropped 'Em

[Anonymous Coward]

Lets hope Sprint holds out to get enough people to switch, otherwise they may be bought out and make the market into a giant coke vs. pepsi charade where nobody wins.

Droid 3

[openldev]

Darn! That lines up with the rumored release date of the Droid 3 ...

Re:Droid 3

[cob666]

Much in the same way that Verizon stopped offering unlimited global packages (useful while traveling to Canada) right before they introduced the iPhone.

What uses what traffic?

[DigiShaman]

I've got a Droid2 myself. Almost all of my data traffic gets routed through someone's WiFi (I've got a long list saved). But when I'm away, it's generally only Google Maps data and e-mail traffic. How about the rest of you out there?

Re:What uses what traffic?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm halfway through my month and I've already racked up 4.5 gbs of data. I travel a lot, so I download podcast on the road, I stream netflix to the tv using my usb to component cable, and I use Amazon and Google Music cloud storage for my music. These prices blow. Guess I've got Sprint in my future.

Re:What uses what traffic?

[Anonymous Coward]

I drive a lot for work and I am constantly either streaming music via pandoa or google music. Along with a little netflix streaming thrown in while I am waiting somewhere. Always using maps and I eat up a lot of bandwidth. If verizon tries to switch me to a tiered plan I will take my service elsewhere.

Re:What uses what traffic?

[noc007]

I use my phone more when I'm away from an AP. Having to setup an AP profile and use the web login at a restaurant, coffee shop, or store just to look up something is a bit of a PITA and I'd rather use the wireless connection I'm already paying a hefty fee for the privilege. When I'm at home or in the office, I use my computer and really don't have much of a need to use my phone. I stream music and occasionally use navigation while I drive. Even when I don't stream music over the internet, I can still hit 2 gigs easily.

Re:What uses what traffic?

[MaWeiTao]

I ended up using the phone a lot more than I had expected but my 3G usage has remained low. I generally only use the 3G network on my Android phone for email and looking up random things while shopping. Any time I download something I switch to WiFi. Since I'm usually only compelled to do that when I'm at home or at the office it's not an issue.

Re:What uses what traffic?

[nschubach]

Same here. I stream music while at work and I regularly push up to and over 4G/month. I could accept 5G/month for $30 (because that's what I pay for "unlimited" now) but there's no way I'm paying another $20/month to continue what I do today.

Re:What uses what traffic?

[jank1887]

maybe you've forgotten:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRgNOyCnbqg

Re:What uses what traffic?

[MacGyver2210]

Fuck that, I run torrents on my droid pretty much nonstop. I pay $30 a month for UNLIMITED fucking bandwidth, and I'll be damned if I'm not going to use it.

I also refuse to pay more to go 'beyond unlimited' so I can tether, so I just rooted the bitch and now my computer has free 'net anywhere, anytime.

Ask Verizon what a gig of data costs them to transfer. Seriously. I'm sure it's well below a nickel. So how does charging ~300x the cost of an item not qualify them for a lawsuit somehow? Isn't that usury? Price gouging? Something?

Re:What uses what traffic?

[DigiShaman]

Ya, I pretty much do the same. 3G is convenient in a pinch, but the performance isn't nearly as good as a local WiFi connection. I tend to leave the app downloading and updating activities exclusively WiFi only as I generally only do that while at home or the office anyways.

We are watching the beginning of an epic battle

[MetalliQaZ]

This is a battle that I have no idea who will win. The lines are drawn.

On one side, we have companies like Comcast and Verizon that are developing faster and faster technologies, but cap the amount of data that their users can consume. They are also companies that that have dreams of vertical integration of products, where they control the content creation, distribution, and consumption, and the profits that come with each.

On the other side, we have companies that are located in the "info space", who are innovating new ways to deliver stuff (entertainment, business services, communication, whatever) to the people. They are the ones advertising "the cloud". Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Facebook, Netflix, etc. They want access to consumers over an open communications network. However, they can't have users afraid to use their bandwidth allotment in order to use the cloud.

So, here we have competing goals, and only one can dominate. Who will it be? I, personally, hope that the Netflix/Google crowd somehow wins. "Give the people what they want." That is a quote that Comcast and Verizon have never understood. They are anti-competitive by nature. This battle will spill out into mass-media debates and government regulation. It will be ugly.

-d

Re:We are watching the beginning of an epic battle

[Anonymous Coward]

So, here we have competing goals, and only one can dominate.
 
Stop living in such a black and white world and you'd see things differently. Is it that hard to do?

Re:We are watching the beginning of an epic battle

[PhxBlue]

Seems like the easiest way for Google and Netflix to win would be to get into the business of delivering bandwidth. There's obviously a market for it.

Re:We are watching the beginning of an epic battle

[wintercolby]

All it takes is at least one network provider in each major market to go along with the Netflix/Google model. There may be legitimate smaller (than Verizon or Comcast) operators in most cities that can do it. Now all we need is for the likes of Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, Apple and Netflix to recognize those players and incentivize them.

Never forget, it was the cable companies that once charged for a commercial free service, because we were paying them directly. Now we have a product with commercials even on many of the more upscale channels. They change their deal when it's convenient, the same way Verizon is acting with their Cell Data service.

Re:We are watching the beginning of an epic battle

[imric]

The goals are opposed. (The companies may adapt) Is that so hard to see?

One goal is to limit access and reap the rewards of scarcity by hiking rates. This limits expenses and keeps the income, meaning higher profit. (verizon)

Another goal is to use ubiquity to profit by volume, as OPPOSED to scarcity. (google, facebook, netflix).

If they cooperate, competition is lost.

If they compete, one or the other goal will be eliminated. The market is all ABOUT minimizing competition (co-opting or eliminating), because competition lowers profit. The only way for both models to exist in the market is regulation.

Re:We are watching the beginning of an epic battle

[Anonymous Coward]

Google Fiber

Re:We are watching the beginning of an epic battle

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe this is already a work-in-progress:

http://www.google.com/appserve/fiberrfi/

Re:We are watching the beginning of an epic battle

[Jon_S]

Especially if you are Google. Google makes its money from advertising. If I am metered on my downloads, I sure as hell will not be downloading ads. There's lots of ways to do this. I don't now because I don't really care. When I start paying to download those ads, then I start really caring.

Re:We are watching the beginning of an epic battle

[ShakaUVM]

>>Comcast and Verizon that are developing faster and faster technologies, but cap the amount of data that their users can consume.

3G isn't a faster or new technology, but they're dropping their unlimited plans for it anyway.

Classic bait and switch. Before, they offered 31 days of heavy data use. Now they offer about 2. But they've got lock-in from their customers, so they feel they can fuck them over.

2GB is a laughably low limit for a month of data service, even without tethering.

Re:We are watching the beginning of an epic battle

[evilviper]

[...] have dreams of vertical integration of products, where they control the content creation, distribution, and consumption, and the profits that come with each.

The gaping flaw with your theory, is that Verizon is eliminating their own competitive advantage, at the same time they change the rate structure.

Previously, the data consumed with a Verizon-branded app was NOT counted against your data plan. However, it's in the works to change all that, so you DO get data charges from using Verizon-branded applications, in addition to whatever monthly fee you have to pay for the app in the first place. It was mostly in-place with the iPhone at launch, but the plan is to roll this change out to all smartphones, an I expect that to happen within a few months.

So, what Verizon is trying to do is double-dip, charging you for an application subscription, then the data on top of that. However, this is TAKING AWAY their "vertical integration" advantage in it's entirety. There's just no longer going to be any anti-competitive benefit to buying a service from Verizon, over the same service from one of their competitors.

thanks VZ

[Anonymous Coward]

thanks Verizon ... I was waiting for a reason to more to a different provider and this was just the push I needed.

Re:thanks VZ

[Anonymous Coward]

and just where are you going to go exactly?

Re:thanks VZ

[gmhowell]

and just where are you going to go exactly?

Galt Gulch?

Poor Americans

[Cobra_666]

And in Poland, I pay 33pln (less than $10) per month and I use that for calls/sms AND get FREE 6GB of data.

Re:Poor Americans

[Airdorn]

Yeah but then, you have to live in Poland.... :(

Re:Poor Americans

[MetalliQaZ]

How fast is it? I envy the cost of your plan, but I also wonder how it compares to Verizon's LTE network. It is not unusual to see 20Mbit downstream on their LTE network. The 3G EV-DO on Verizon could do something like 2Mbit.

Re:Poor Americans

[MacGyver2210]

Prices and contracts being discussed are for 3G, not 4G/LTE. You're paying $30/month for 2GB of the same shitty 3G service you've been getting unlimited for the last 3 years. Congratufuckinglations.

Re:Poor Americans

[Cobra_666]

It does manage to achieve 7Mbit/s on my Nexus One. I've heard from friends that it can also do hsdpa+ speeds. No LTE though.

Re:Poor Americans

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the issue is "Rich Americans", not "Poor Americans"

Re:Poor Americans

[Anonymous Coward]

No idea what kind of speeds polish are getting, but here in Finland, unlimited 42/5.6 Mbit/s for 20€/month. Real life download speeds up to 30Mbit/s, but it varies at alot. 3G I guess, but I'm not sure what "4G" is really supposed to buy.

My wife got unlimited 512/512kbit/s in her phone, 4.9€/month.

Pricing!!

[Taft138]

I use between 8-12 GB a month. I know, freakish, so staying grandfathered in with AT&T was smart. The companies, however, are just gouging us like the gas companies. Theres no reason everything shouldn't be unlimited. I mean seriously, think about what they draw in monthly, just on base plans alone!

Sprint spotty?

[Picass0]

Not where I live. Sprint never gives me less than three bars even around tall buildings.

Re:Sprint spotty?

[Yosho]

Where I live, I get two or three bars when I'm outside, one or two when I'm inside.

Anecdotes, data, YMMV, etc.

Ugh..really?

[JustAnotherIdiot]

I just dropped at&t and went to verizon for this same reason. Seems as soon as this contract expires, I'm going elsewhere.

Re:Ugh..really?

[GameboyRMH]

Where? Back to AT&T? How many cell providers are there in the US now?

Re:Ugh..really?

[JustAnotherIdiot]

Sprint is still around I believe, granted, I have no idea what they offer.

Re:Ugh..really?

[tycoex]

Unlimited Data without tethering for about 15 dollars less a month than Verizon. Coverage isn't as good but it may be fine depending on where you live, make sure you check first.

Re:Ugh..really?

[JustAnotherIdiot]

I shall keep this in mind, thank you for the information.

Devil's Advocate

[s31523]

I can see why Verizon is moving down this path. Higher speed, more reliable connections, and more users makes for a very expensive network. If people really don't like it, they will switch to another carrier who offers unlimited data, or resort to only connecting via Wi-Fi or tethering. What I don't understand is this low cap. 2 Gb is not very much data, especially considering all the advertising that shows streaming video and watching TV on your phone or tablet. The 2Gb limit is especially confusing when you look at tablet's. The tablet's will (IMHO) eat up a lot of the market share for laptops and netbooks very soon and people will want to surf seamlessly between connections (LAN, WLAN, 4G, etc.). In the end, I could easily see Verizon making a lot of money in the short term, but as other networks grow and offer better deals we will see the bandwidth caps go higher and possibly more data tiers.

Re:Devil's Advocate

[Jon_S]

If people really don't like it, they will ..., or resort to only connecting via Wi-Fi or tethering.

Except that you can't. You can't buy a phone from them without the dataplan. If you could I would.

Re:Devil's Advocate

[bhtooefr]

You can buy a dumbphone, or go to an old Windows Mobile phone or something.

Or buy a Chinese-market Android phone, and hack the MEID to match that of your dumbphone. Federal felony, but...

Re:Devil's Advocate

[Anonymous Coward]

I can see why Verizon is moving down this path. Higher speed, more reliable connections, and more users makes for a very expensive network. If people really don't like it, they will switch to another carrier who offers unlimited data, or resort to only connecting via Wi-Fi or tethering. What I don't understand is this low cap. 2 Gb is not very much data, especially considering all the advertising that shows streaming video and watching TV on your phone or tablet. The 2Gb limit is especially confusing when you look at tablet's. The tablet's will (IMHO) eat up a lot of the market share for laptops and netbooks very soon and people will want to surf seamlessly between connections (LAN, WLAN, 4G, etc.). In the end, I could easily see Verizon making a lot of money in the short term, but as other networks grow and offer better deals we will see the bandwidth caps go higher and possibly more data tiers.

I think the cap can be explained by studying customer usage of the network. There will always be "heavy users", "general business users", and "occasional users". The typical carrier can generally forecast usage and deploy capacity for the latter 2 cases, but not for "heavy users". I would say that price tiers are aimed at the first two cases: "heavy" and "business". I agree that Tablet users are going to "get hit" by these pricing tiers.

As a "business" user I use more than I would as an "occasional" user. My employer pays for my business phone and reviews the bills every month while expecting us to "keep expenses under control". I might use 3G or Wi-Fi in an airport waiting for a plane or at a business meeting; which one I use is based on how much hassle it is to access. For personal use I don't use 3G or whatever; too costly for that. If I were a "heavy user" that constantly streamed stuff I would start finding ways to collect that stuff via cable or Wi-Fi for playback later. Yeah, that is "soooo yesterday" with "cloud technologies", "always ON Internet", "streaming stuff", and constant updates from Facebook/Twitter/etc., but "cool costs money". Ask any fashionista!!

Not terribly surprised

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not hugely surprised.

Mobile phone networks have spotted the downward trend in bandwidth costs and know there's only two things they can do about this if they want the bottom line to continue to trend upwards:

1. Encourage as many people as possible onto their networks in order to compensate for the loss of income.
2. Figure out some way to bump up their prices without losing customers hand over fist.

The problem with (1) is - AIUI - for it to work they'd need to dramatically boost the bandwidth their network can offer. And this is rather more expensive for a cell network than it is for a fixed-line ISP. This leaves (2).

Right now we're seeing this done in pretty much the only way they can and it's fairly crude - eliminate unlimited data plans and charge the earth on a per-megabyte basis. Expect this to become a lot more subtle with time - I know of one company that is looking to sell a centrally managed QoS solution that goes into the handset itself, which if they succeed would allow very fine-grained control over what the network can do to charge their customers.

"You're making Skype calls over our network but you're finding the call quality is poor? You need our Skype addon, Sir, it's only £3/month extra. Shall I add it to your account now?"

(Posting anonymously for obvious reasons)

Re:Not terribly surprised

[GameboyRMH]

"You're making Skype calls over our network but you're finding the call quality is poor? You need our Skype addon, Sir, it's only £3/month extra. Shall I add it to your account now?"

They already do something like this, in reverse. They have deals with Facebook and Twitter to get uncapped access to their sites. In-flight wireless providers and some ISPs do it too (ISPs often giving uncapped access to Windows Updates - not so lucky if you're a Linux or Mac user).

Ridiculous

[MBGMorden]

This is utterly ridiculous. The 2GB plan is what their current Unlimited plan is set at price-wise. I do about 2.5GB per month on my phone and I literally use the data solely for email, VERY sparse Facebook/Twitter/Web usage (about 90 minutes of active usage per month tops), and podcast downloads (the bulk of my data usage).

I barely use the data plan and I'm still over that mark. If these numbers are true, and there is no grandfathering, then I will NOT be sticking with Verizon.

Re:Ridiculous

[ultramk]

Erm, download your podcasts over wi-fi and cache them on the phone for later listening pleasure. There goes 9/10ths of your data usage.

That isn't really your complaint, though. Your real complaint is that you were sold an unlimited plan and that's what you want. I understand, I really do. Went through it myself not too long back. However, if you take just a little step back you'll realize that radio spectrum isn't an unlimited resource, and with data usage growing at such phenomenal rates there's no real way to get people to be more efficient about their usage (like, for example, pulling your podcasts over landlines instead of clogging up cell towers with them) without usage limits of some sort.

The standard response at this point is to say that the bandwidth saturation problem is the carrier's problem because they are just being greedy, won't improve their network blah blah blah. OK, so put yourself in their shoes. Come up with a 5-year network hardware expansion plan that can compensate for unrestricted *exponential growth*. Let that sink in for a minute.

Re:Ridiculous

[space_jake]

Yeah this is exactly where I am too. 2.5 GB / month usage, the bulk of my data is Pandora (lower bitstream)/Amazon Cloud Player/Google Music beta at work on weekdays. I'll be hopping ship to Sprint when my contract is up in November, hopefully they won't axe unlimited plans too before then.

Re:Ridiculous

[MBGMorden]

Erm, download your podcasts over wi-fi and cache them on the phone for later listening pleasure. There goes 9/10ths of your data usage.

Sometimes they do download over wifi when I'm at home, but realistically I don't want to wait until I get home to download new episodes of things. I got the damned phone so I'd have access to such things at all times. If I was willing to download via wifi I'd have simply kept using my iPod Touch and not worried about getting a smartphone in the first place.

Understand this: I really, really, truly, don't give a damn about their problems. We're not holding hands and figuring out something that will work for the both of us. I'm a customer. They'll make it work at a price I'm willing to pay, or I'm not paying for the service. That's it. Sob stories don't change my viewpoint.

Re:Ridiculous

[rmp135]

You should be thankful. Over in the UK, O2 (the original iPhone exclusive carrier) dropped their unlimited to 500mb without any change in price or 'grandfathering' for existing customers. Outside of the contract, you pay for an additional (on top of your text/phone rate) 1GB for ~ $16.

Re:Ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

This is utterly ridiculous. The 2GB plan is what their current Unlimited plan is set at price-wise. I do about 2.5GB per month on my phone and I literally use the data solely for email, VERY sparse Facebook/Twitter/Web usage (about 90 minutes of active usage per month tops), and podcast downloads (the bulk of my data usage).

I barely use the data plan and I'm still over that mark. If these numbers are true, and there is no grandfathering, then I will NOT be sticking with Verizon.

And there is your problem probably. I have 5 email accounts on my phone (2 work, 3 person) and use the web all the time (a few hours a day) with some Hulu if I feel like it. All my music and apps are done on the computer. I hardly break the 1GB mark. Only once have I gone over the 2GB mark (went 3.2GB) because I was downloading everything on the phone (4G/HSPA+ phone at that time) and thankfully was on an unlimited plan. I find it funny when people complain and yet dont change their routines/habits to keep their usage low.

Re:Ridiculous

[MBGMorden]

I find it funny when people complain and yet dont change their routines/habits to keep their usage low.

As a I referenced in another post - my main reason for getting the phone was for podcast downloads. Previously, I had an iPod Touch that allowed me to do that over wifi. That wasn't sufficient. I bought the phone so I'd have "always on" access to that. If I have to worry about shifting around routines and habits and managing what I do on the phone as if it were a spending account, then it's not worth the hassle to me. I have no desire to pay for such a "service".

Re:Ridiculous

[ChinggisK]

The rumors suggest that there will be grandfathering.

Re:Ridiculous

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

However, if you take just a little step back you'll realize that radio spectrum isn't an unlimited resource, and with data usage growing at such phenomenal rates there's no real way to get people to be more efficient about their usage (like, for example, pulling your podcasts over landlines instead of clogging up cell towers with them) without usage limits of some sort.

Right, but these aren't usage limits, they're a money grab.

Come up with a 5-year network hardware expansion plan that can compensate for unrestricted *exponential growth*.

Your rate is x dollars per megabyte.

Re:Ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

Answer to this is easy, it is called don't promise what you can't deliver. Also doesn't AT&T have a lot of spectrum they don't even use they just got it to shut out competition? Yeah, that stuff should be illegal along with defensive patents, IE patenting something so no one else can work in that area so a better product than what you are willing to deliver can't be made.

Re:Ridiculous

[locallyunscene]

However, if you take just a little step back you'll realize that radio spectrum isn't an unlimited resource, and with data usage growing at such phenomenal rates there's no real way to get people to be more efficient about their usage (like, for example, pulling your podcasts over landlines instead of clogging up cell towers with them) without usage limits of some sort

Utter bullshit. I live in NYC and it seems like everyone here has a smart phone. I can still connect download and do everything no problem. There is no crisis of "radio spectrum limitations". They just want to turn data usage into SMS 2.0; don't fucking buy it for a second.

Re:Ridiculous

[Just Some Guy]

The standard response at this point is to say that the bandwidth saturation problem is the carrier's problem because they are just being greedy, won't improve their network blah blah blah.

I guess I'd be more sympathetic if I hadn't signed a damned "unlimited plan" contract with them. I couldn't give two shits how or why they can't or won't uphold their end of the contract. If I stopped paying my full owed price each month, they'd cancel my account and bill me for early termination. What's my (viable) recourse when they cry that they're not able to deliver on their word?

I'm not asking for fully uncapped gigabit transfers 24x7x365. That's not a reasonable expectation. I'm just asking for what I contracted for: the ability to do all the stuff their advertising told me I could do back before I signed on the dotted line.

Re:Ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

How about they thought about this before they started offering unlimited plans, how about you stop locking people into the phone plans you choose and let people decide what they want to use. How about they encourage better data compression ratios across their networks. How about we start charging per gigabyte they use of what used to be the public's spectrum. It was OUR spectrum they made their money on. So cry me a river about their problems.

Re:Ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

Erm, download your podcasts over wi-fi and cache them on the phone for later listening pleasure. There goes 9/10ths of your data usage.

Sometimes they do download over wifi when I'm at home, but realistically I don't want to wait until I get home to download new episodes of things. I got the damned phone so I'd have access to such things at all times. If I was willing to download via wifi I'd have simply kept using my iPod Touch and not worried about getting a smartphone in the first place.

Understand this: I really, really, truly, don't give a damn about their problems. We're not holding hands and figuring out something that will work for the both of us. I'm a customer. They'll make it work at a price I'm willing to pay, or I'm not paying for the service. That's it. Sob stories don't change my viewpoint.

Your comments justed answered the question why carriers are moving to tiered pricing. They are trying to find price points that people are willing to accept. That's your point exactly. There will always be a carrier or two that will use pricing or "unlimited usage" to lure in customers; dial-up Internet via AOL and the first cable modems were like that.

Remember that contracts have a fixed length of time, typically 2 years. When 2 years is up you reconsider what contracts are available or go "month to month"; that's the "competitive" model of the wireless industry. Contracts are designed to lock in revenue streams and customer base; it's that simple. So if you reconsider when your contract is up and decide a new carrier is what you want, change carriers and stop whining about it.

The problem with most customers, as I see it this:
(1) They get used to certain contract terms and expect them to be around forever.
(2) They fail to realize they signed a fixed-length contract with specific service terms for the contract period.
(3) In the USA the wireless industry is basically "unregulated", unlike "wireline phone" or "cable TV". Internet access is generally "unregulated" in the USA.

So long as the carrier honors that contract for the contract term, nothing illegal happened. If the carrier announces new contract terms are coming out, the whining starts, and it typically starts with the "big users" (bandwidth hogs). They forget point (2) and refuse to accept point (1). Screaming for "regulation" will make matters worse. I remember when "wireline phone" service was much more regulated (I worked for one of those companies at the time...first-hand knowledge speaking), causing consumer choices to be much more limited and innovation to occur at a "snail's pace". It took court orders to allow consumers to attach the first answering machines to the Bell network. Do you want to go back to that? I don't.

I'd say the USA market in wireless is fairly competitive except for the continuing consolidation of carriers. Consolidation is a side-effect of competition; carriers grow larger by buying other carriers in the same business because it's cheeper than competing for them. Some try to compete on price (Sprint) and that attracts customers, usually the "bandwidth hogs" migrate first. Who migrated first from dial-up Internet to cable modems when they became available? "bandwith hogs" (I was one once). Once that "low cost" carrier starts to see an influx of customers they start adjusting the price plans. Some carriers "look fast" right now because they don't have a lot of "heavy users" on them to consume the capacity. That is what makes Sprint attractive right now, but it could change if lots of "heavy users" flock to them.

One last comment: Always try to determine if a carrier operates their own network. Boost & Virgin do not operate their own networks; they are MVNOs (mobile virtual network operators) using Sprint's network. Tracfone uses AT&T's network for their GSM phones. As far as I can tell, VZW does not have any MVNOs using it's network. The MVNO concept is different, very different, from "roaming".

What strikes me as funny is this: Some people decry Sprint's network as "lousy" yet others see it as the "unlimited network of last resort" due to AT&T-Tmob merger and these "rumored" VZW pricing changes.

Re:Ridiculous

[rgviza]

why not use WiFi for downloading podcasts? Just sayin'. A very small change in your behavior completely mitigates this as a problem for you.

Re:Ridiculous

[MBGMorden]

See:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2256462&cid=36515486
and
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2256462&cid=36514074

Quick summary though: I used to use my iPod Touch to do that over wi-fi. One of the main reasons I explicitly got the phone was so that I wouldn't have to do that anymore.

Honestly, if the answer to complaints is "use wifi", then what the hell am I paying for a cellular data plan for?

Re:Ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

Understand this: I really, really, truly, don't give a damn about their problems.

Do you HONESTLY think your carrier gives a damn about YOURS?

Re:Ridiculous

[MBGMorden]

Not anymore than any other vendor I do business with does, but the catch is I have something they want - money. Enough by myself for them to care? Not likely. However, as part of a greater whole that they WOULD care about? That remains to be seen. It's simple business here. Do something that ticks off your customers and it can hurt your bottom line. Do something that pisses off ENOUGH of them and it can REALLY hurt your bottom line.

Re:Ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

Well.. All I can say is that if they would just let us Drill for Oil in the the good ole US we wouldnt have so much dependence on Foreign Bandwidth.. ER.. I think thats what that Verizon Ad Said.. Bahhh.. Hey gotta go.. just heard a friend calling sheepishly...

Hey I know.. Vote for a Republican.. They will lower taxes.. so that we can all afford more bandwidth...

This'll drive me away

[Anonymous Coward]

My wife just re-upped our contract in April. If they grandfather me in, ok. If not, I'll have to jump ship because I use about 6GB/month. If they were to family this out, .. so if I can get the 2GB plan for 30 with $10/GB after that, spread across two phones, then, that's $70 for what I currently pay $60 for (two phones). If not (And I bet not) then I'll have to pay $30 for wife's and another $70/80 for me! That would take my bill to about $200/month for two phones. That just ain't gonna happen.

Well, that's wonderful news!

[tompaulco]

This is good news. You see I have an unlimited data plan with Verizon and my bill is about $60 a month. With this new 2 GB cap plan, they must surely be offering it at a much lower price than the unlimited plan, and so I should be able to switch and save money.

Re:Well, that's wonderful news!

[Huckabees]

My sarcasm detector is going off the charts!

Re:Well, that's wonderful news!

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL, you think Verizon is actually going to *save* you money with this? There isn't enough competition to drive prices down in this market, they can screw the consumer however they want now and get away with it.

I guarantee the new 2gb plan will be the current 30 dollar "unlimited" (because its actually something between 5GB - 10GB) plan.

Re:Well, that's wonderful news!

[ChinggisK]

*woooooosh*

More shots in a long war

[Registered Coward v2]

This is just part of what will be a contentious battle between the bandwidth owners and the content / service providers. Both sides want to extract as much of the consumer dollar as possible for themselves. Bandwidth owners see content / service providers using their lines to make money and as usage increases they see an opportunity to extract some of that money through tiered rate plans. content / service providers, OTOH, want the pipe to be as big and cheap as possible so they can sell more things to the consumer.

As bandwidth gets more expensive, consumers will use less and be willing to pay less for content since it carries an added cost for bandwidth. By introducing tiers early in the bandwidth demand growth phase carriers can start getting their customers used to limiting uptake of new services (and pay more to boot). Why is this important - it gives carriers some leverage to extract money form content/services providers to unthrottle the pipes since the providers want to keep growing and grab as many customers as quickly as possible.

I expect this battle will play out in the commercial and political arena as well - with lamentations about jobs, infrastructure costs, "staying competitive withe (insert country of choice)" being heard as each side tries to gain and maintain the upper hand. In some cases, a company is both - my cable provider is more than happy to sell me a subscription to HBO which I can access on the go via my phone as well (which is provided by another company). My phone company no doubt looks at that and says "Why are we helping our competitor for free?"

Make no mistake, it's an important battle since, if rate caps become the norm, this cool vision of getting everything anywhere over the internet will be a long time coming. I wouldn't be surprised to see some sort of tyins between content /service providers and carriers that allows you to get premium services w/o being charged for data and the company's splitting the revenue. In fact, I think that may be the end game some have in mind.

Re:More shots in a long war

[NeutronCowboy]

I wouldn't be surprised to see some sort of tyins between content /service providers and carriers that allows you to get premium services w/o being charged for data and the company's splitting the revenue. In fact, I think that may be the end game some have in mind.

This. This is indeed the end-game, at least for the major carriers. They realize that they're sitting on what is basically an access monopoly, and are trying to figure out how to leverage it for rent-seeking. They realize no one cares about access itself, they care about what they can access. Hence all the major carriers buying out content providers: they get the content they don't have, and can now work on extracting maximum price for that content. The easiest way to do that is to make other content more expensive. And the easiest way to do that... is through bandwidth caps and special Facebook/Twitter/NBC/Hulu offers. End-users are forced into accepting the choices offered by their carrier, and content-providers are forced to pay the carriers extra to gain access to the carriers' users.
It's a wonderful end-run around net-neutrality: it won't matter, because users themselves will make the choice not to go to Netflix, but to whatever Comcast decides to host for "free".

There will still be an Internet, but at least in the US, it will be expensive, and only hardcore geeks with money will be on it.

Re:More shots in a long war

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't AOL try doing that same thing? Come access all our content uncapped - but getting out to that "internet" would be metered.

Leave it to the wireless telcos to end-game an idea that died 15-ish years ago.

Then again maybe if AOL smeared the "premium" moniker on all their internal content, they woulda gotten away with it.

Re:More shots in a long war

[Rockoon]

This is just part of what will be a contentious battle between the bandwidth owners and the content / service providers.

I gotta interject here, because you are forgetting someone: You.

You think Google/etc has your back on this one so you can just go ahead and keep paying too much for a shitty plan? and eventually things will get better? It will not get better as long as you keep buying the product, dumbass.

If the local store charged $100 per gallon for rancid pig vomit, and somehow amazingly rancid pig vomit was the coolest shit since sliced bread such that tons of people pay that price.. THEY MIGHT EVEN RAISE THE PRICE! DUH!!!!

Clearly you dipshits think the service you are getting is worth the price. I'll stick with my ~$7/month pre-paid dumb-phone, thanks.

Re:More shots in a long war

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you missed a few exclamation points in there, or something...

Blame it on the iPhone

[sl4shd0rk]

I know it's not the popular comment but it's true. Verizon and Sprint had unlimited data plans as long as they were offering ghetto phones (Android, Samsung, etc). What's the difference if you're downloading unlimited data on an iPhone or a ghetto phone? Give up? Apple gets a cut of the revenue (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/the-real-cost-of-at-ts-basic-data-plan/7362) that's why. And don't feel like you're sneaking by with Sprint. They are next to be assimilated (http://www.eldergadget.com/report-sprint-testing-iphone-4s/). I guess I'll go to T-Mob... Oh wait, that's right. We gave all our money to the monopoly and have no alternatives left. Oh well, guess I'll go back to my Tracfone.

Re:Blame it on the iPhone

[LWATCDR]

ghetto phones? I hate summer because the kids are out and have nothing to do but post on Slashdot.
I chose my Evo 4G on Sprint over going with an iPhone or AT&T.

Re:Blame it on the iPhone

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree I have owned both a iPhone and now my Evo. I will take the Evo anytime of the week.

Re:Blame it on the iPhone

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, well ignoring your whole "ghetto android" phone comment, here's the reality of it:

http://www.businessinsider.com/nielsen-android-still-clobbering-apples-iphone-rims-blackberry-2011-5

For those that don't want to click through, the article shows (a bit further down) that on average android phone users are consuming more data per month than iphone/bb/etc users. Verizon is offering pretty awesome android phones (the whole Droid* line), all ready to consume tons of data to show video on large screens... nothing ghetto there. Oops a lot?

Re:Blame it on the iPhone

[Civil_Disobedient]

And don't feel like you're sneaking by with Sprint. They are next to be assimilated (http://www.eldergadget.com/report-sprint-testing-iphone-4s/).

Sorry... how does that logic work again? Just because they're supporting iPhones, that means they're "the next to be assimilated?"

Weak, man. I've been running my (much better than the iPhone) Samsung Epic on Sprint since Christmas. It's awesome. And no bandwidth cap.

Re:Blame it on the iPhone

[bhtooefr]

I suspect "ghetto phone" wasn't referring to Android, but was referring to Windows Mobile (think 6.5 and older, not Windows Phone 7) and dumbphones, where data plans can be far cheaper in certain cases.

I actually stuck with WinMo 6.5 for far, far longer than I should have, simply due to the plan restrictions required to get an Android phone.

Re:Blame it on the iPhone

[LWATCDR]

You would be wrong. "Verizon and Sprint had unlimited data plans as long as they were offering ghetto phones (Android, Samsung, etc). "
So yes Android was mentioned.

Re:Blame it on the iPhone

[Anonymous Coward]

I know it's not the popular comment but it's true. Verizon and Sprint had unlimited data plans as long as they were offering ghetto phones (Android, Samsung, etc). What's the difference if you're downloading unlimited data on an iPhone or a ghetto phone? Give up? Apple gets a cut of the revenue (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/the-real-cost-of-at-ts-basic-data-plan/7362) that's why. And don't feel like you're sneaking by with Sprint. They are next to be assimilated (http://www.eldergadget.com/report-sprint-testing-iphone-4s/). I guess I'll go to T-Mob... Oh wait, that's right. We gave all our money to the monopoly and have no alternatives left. Oh well, guess I'll go back to my Tracfone.

How are Android phones "ghetto" exactly? My Drioid Pro does everything my friend's iPhone does. As a matter of fact I'm rooted and have wireless tethering that I didn't spend a cent on, he has to jailbreak AND buy an app to do that.

Apple makes a ton of over priced stuff that it pretends to invent when very little of it is innovative in anyway past the GUI. (You know because MP3 players never existed before iPod, smartphones never existed before the iPhone, and tablets never existed before the iPad). I'm not saying you can't enjoy your candy coated walled garden, but there's no need to insult everybody who doesn't want to belong to your cult.

Re:Blame it on the iPhone

[jomcty]

Remember, only a lucky, privileged few are allowed to purchase an iPhone. I heard a lottery system is used where Steve Jobs himself chooses the next lucky iPhone owner. The rest of us lost souls choose to buy a ghetto phone, like my Nexus S.

It's you cheap over-users that are causing this...

[Anonymous Coward]

Fact is most people don't even need more than 300mb a month. Why is this happening? Yes, partly because of carrier greed. The other reason is a few cheap asses decided to take advantage (as is their right true ) of the unlimited wireless plan (ignoring the spirit of what was fair) a to use levels wireless was never designed to support for lots of people. So while most of us could easily deal with 1gb or 2gb a month, likely why it's priced this level, the jerks out there who used 10s of gb a month are the reason the carriers are getting an excuse to cap us all. If you want to download movies, linux ISOs, do it via your cable/DSL home ISP you cheap assholes. Wireless was never really made/designed/intended for this type of use.

Not an official press release

[Anonymous Coward]

This article is on Droid Life, it's not an official press release. None of us Verizon customers have received notice about that, and when I contacted Verizon, they denied it. Everyone's making a big deal about speculation again...

Do I think it's inevitable? Yes. Do I think it's going to happen when they say it will? Maybe, but I won't believe it until I see a press release.

Re:Not an official press release

[Niris]

They won't send everyone notices. It'll only come up when it starts to affect people at contract renewal time. As for contacting Verizon, you aren't REALLY contacting them. Their customer service is outsourced to a company called Ryla in central California that is run by retards and no information is ever passed to the actual people on the phone who spend all day being bitched at by other retards across the country.

Re:Not an official press release

[Lunix Nutcase]

They won't send everyone notices.

Except for the fact that they would be legally obligated to do so? They can't just change the terms of your contract without letting you know.

Re:Not an official press release

[Niris]

Did you even read the article? Last paragraph even says they don't have a confirmation on if it will affect current contracts or only new contracts. More than likely it'll only affect new contracts rather than people who already have the plan just to avoid the giant hassles of changing contracts and pissing off people.

What's the point?

[Anonymous Coward]

So all that encouragement from Verizon to use their service instead of a regular physical line ISP is all for nothing? What a waste. What's the point of having 4G then when the prices are the same as 3G, but now with an even smaller cap?

Mother Fucker!

[Anonymous Coward]

Goddam these assholes!!

I wonder how AT&T will respond?

[Anonymous Coward]

When will AT&T raise their price to match?

Re:I wonder how AT&T will respond?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or will they start advertising the heck out of their lower rates?

They offer a very low end data plan:

200 MB for $15 (overage costs $15 and gets you an extra 200 MB).
2 GB for $25 (overage costs $10 and gets you an extra 1 GB).

AT&T's problem is that they have no high end. Though, how Verizon can justify going from a $30, Unlimited Plan to a $30, 2 GB Plan seems questionable at best. I do hope that this is the beginning of a mass defection from Verizon though. I don't really want to see the other networks get overloaded as a result of it, but Verizon is one of the worst businesses that I have ever dealt with.

Re:I wonder how AT&T will respond?

[Anonymous Coward]

200Mb for $15 WTF? You lot on the western side of thr Atlantic are sure being taken for a ride.
Here in the UK I get 15Gb for £15.($22 approx). I get 4-6Mbits in most places I use it. Ironically, the worst pace is Portobello Rd, London. Here I get 256Kbit if I'm lucky. Oh, and this is not the best plan around.

Re:I wonder how AT&T will respond?

[Anonymous Coward]

(Same AC you replied too, but have moderated)

Just to be clear, it is 200 MB. Not a huge consolation, but at least it's 8 times the size of 200 Mb.

I also completely agree. Unlimited should be the norm, at around $30; I could possibly be sold on a $10 higher price with higher speeds (LTE) for the short term (as technology matures). From there, lower end plans should be available with overages. Fortunately, I never get close to using 2 GB on my phone, as an AT&T customer, and I dropped to that from unlimited because I have a corporate discount that did not apply to unlimited, but did to 2 GB, which makes it much cheaper.

This is good news

[Anonymous Coward]

If they change my two-year wireless contract (with unlimited data plan), not only will I be able to immediately end my contract with them with no penalties, I get to walk with a $500 phone (HTC Incredible) I only paid $150 for.

Re:This is good news

[darjen]

Same here. I have been looking to get out of my contract and flash my Droid 1 over to a pre-pay service. Hopefully these changes will allow us to do that.

Re:This is good news

[Anonymous Coward]

+1 to this. I just signed on with Verizon at the end of May, paid 100 for my Incredible 2, and got the Buy Back at Best Buy. If they change the contract, I'm immediately cancelling it, and selling the phone back for 300.

eris

[jDeepbeep]

I'm going to bite the bullet and pay the $175 early termination fee. They end-of-lifed my Droid Eris less than 7 months after selling it to me, which means I'm stranded at 2.1 which steadily is becoming more irritating and limiting. This is in addition to your complaints which I mostly agree with (cust. service has been so-so for me).

Re:eris

[h4rr4r]

Eris can get newer OS. The Droid never got anything beyond 2.2 and mine is rocking 2.3.3.

Re:eris

[v1]

I'm going to bite the bullet and pay the $175 early termination fee.

No you're not. Not if you're smart anyway. The contract you signed gives them the right to modify the terms (limit your unlimited) but at the cost of giving you 30 days to void said contract, including ETF. When they change, call and cancel. They'll try to ETF you, then remind them they changed terms and you are exercising your right to terminate the contract without obligation including ETF.

I've seen several do this, and suspiciously close to 100% of the time the rep you talk with will claim "you can't do that". You usually need to get transferred to someone that either knows the law or has been allowed to admit to it. (I wonder if the level 1's really know what you're asking for is legal, but have been told to attempt to BS you out of exercising your right by claiming you don't have it? That's probably not illegal but it sure should be)

Contract law doesn't allow a contract to stipulate one party can make arbitrary changes without also allowing the other party to say "hell no" and walk away. Remember, all contracts work both ways. You're required to do X, and they're required to do Y. If the contract allows them to change Y, you can't be forced to accept it or be penalized if you refuse. In those cases you can't prevent them from changing Y, and if they do, they can't penalize you for terminating the contract.

Re:eris

[spamking]

I'm a Verizon customer and don't remember ever getting anything saying the change was coming . . . are you saying that once they send something to me about the rate change I can legally get out of my contract without paying the ETF if I cancel within 30 days of receiving the notice? Interesting . . .

Re:eris

[v1]

If a contract allows a party to modify terms, the terms they can modify are outlined in the original contract, and the notification process is specified. One party can't just change contract terms without notifying the other party. And that notification will include the effective date, (usually 30 days, there is a minimum notice allowable but I don't know what it is, probably 30 days?) In most cases it's one of those "if we don't hear from you in writing, these terms become effective in 30 days". Credit cards have a big paragraph on this when they send out new TOS "agreements". (I'd call them more like "notifications", but if you don't respond they are binding, so that makes them agreements) Notifications to changes in TOS must be in writing, and refusal to accept the terms technically has to be in writing also, though a phonecall usually suffices. (if they want to put the screw to you they can take your phonecall for nonacceptance, tell you ok nevermind we'll make you the exception you can ignore that TOS change notice, and then change you anyway and deny you called them)

There's usually one short sentence on what happens if you don't respond. Something like "all of the above changes are effective on xxx", followed by a big ominous confusing paragraph on all the things that happen if you don't want to accept the terms. This usually amounts to you losing the service but still owing on any balance, subject to the prior agreement. It's probably designed to try to shy you away from canceling, but they're required by law to spell out what will happen so you are aware that you have the option. They can lie to you (first tier anyway) on the phone about this but they are required to be straight with you in writing. Careful, they like to sneak these into bills along with the other cruft like upsell and affiliate services junk you normally throw out with the envelope the bill came in. But lately all the TOS I've seen have come in their own envelope, maybe another new consumer protection rule?

I've had to call up credit card companies several times when they tried to feed me the shaft on changes in TOS. ("good news, we're jacking your interest rate from 9.9 to 15.9% for no particular reason, sure do hope you're not reading this tiny print") Read the fine print when they send changes in TOS, the important stuff is usually in bold. (required?) All but once the call ended with "ok we'll keep you under the old terms". (rather than losing your business) The most recent one they just waved goodbye to me as a 20 yr long good-standing customer. *shrug* ymmv

The old bait and switch

[Pro923]

When I find that my finances come up short some months - I wonder what the hell I'm doing wrong, I barely go out anymore, I don't buy anymore fancy computers, and I don't even have nice clothes anymore. So I do the balance sheet and I realize that (this is a family of 4) between Comcast and Verizon Wireless, I'm spending about $400 / month on "Living expenses" that just didn't exist when my parents were young, raising children and paying a mortgage. It occurs to me that Verizon is really evil... Now that we're all hooked, they're going to keep finding new ways to get another $10 / line out of everyone and they're not gonna go back on it. You want to have an iPhone like everyone else? Yeah? That's an extra $30 a month. (My wife complained until I got her one). But this stuff is starting to interfere with my ability to pay my mortgage and save for my kids' future education. I would love to let my contracts expire and tell them to cancel everything... But then we'd be like the only people without the ability to text (an extra $5 per line per month!!). The whole thing is getting silly and while I usually try to avoid things that are silly - I can't see a way out of this one.

Re:The old bait and switch

[threeseas]

Start a rehab clinic for others like you... that way at least you can stay addicted... Or just say no to digital drugs...

Re:The old bait and switch

[Jon_S]

Start a rehab clinic for others like you... that way at least you can stay addicted... Or just say no to digital drugs...

Exactly. Verizon offered a product and you chose to buy it. You don't have to pay $400 a month. I have a family of 5 and it's under $200 a month for 5 phones (with texting) and DSL, all through Verizon. You don't need cable/satellite TV these days unless you are into sports.

Re:The old bait and switch

[Pro923]

That's correct - I did. As time goes on, and they reduce service in an attempt to increase cost, will I eventually be able to choose to eliminate my use of the product? It's hard to do - to go backwards in technology. Once you have something, it's tough to give it up. Most of the people that you see walking around with iPhones - I have to assume they can't really afford them. I say it's 'evil' because of the nature of corporations today. It isn't enough to provide a useful service and make a constant profit, there has to be growth. In order to achieve that growth, these companies push and squeeze. And to counter your point, when I chose to buy the product that Verizon offered, it was an unlimited data plan - they've change the product post-purchase.

Re:The old bait and switch

[prestonmichaelh]

I was more or less in the same boat. Here is what I did:

No home phone (why do you really need that anymore anyway, I guess that could very for some).

Cell Phones, Virgin Mobile LG Optimus V. It is a great android phone and my monthly service is $25 for unlimited texting, unlimited data, and 300 minutes. They have higher minute plans if needed, but going over minutes isn't very expensive and you can restart a plan early. My wife and I were on a family plan with AT&T, but two VM plans is cheaper. After the initial cost of the phones, we are coming out way ahead and get a lot more.

TV: We were spending about $100 per month with Dish. Bought a Roku box for living room, put the Wii in the bedroom and got a $9 Netflix streaming plan. Got a $3 a month (averaged out) pandora paid subscription for music. Put a $45 antenna in the attic. I now get better quality HD locals than with Dish (I also have a computer setup to record if desired, but that admittedly does add extra expense) and we watch everything on Netflix or Hulu. Sure, we don't get to watch everything we did, but there is plenty for us to watch (including our daughter) and we shouldn't be watching so much TV anyway. Plus, the way I put it to my wife was "Is $1000 a year worth it to watch House Hunters on HGTV"? I think when you put it in terms like that and realize that if you give up a few shows to save a lot of money, it is an easy decision. Also, I tend to find that for most people that have "can't miss shows" after a few weeks of not seeing them, they don't really care about that show anymore. All they really want is a few hours of mindless TV entertainment and the exact show doesn't always matter.

No such thing as "unlimited"

[DragonHawk]

There is no such thing as "unlimited". It doesn't exist. There are always limits. Sometimes the limits are more deliberately imposed than other times, but they are always there. This is an inescapable part of reality. "Anyone who says differently is selling something."

Thus "unlimited" should be a danger word, like "free" or "forever". Any time you see them, you should immediately realize the sales guy is lying to you, and thus employ extra caution.

I can also say that there were, indeed, deliberate limits on the so-called "unlimited data plans" before. They just were not widely acknowledged or published, and were often inconsistently applied. They usually didn't have a direct billing consequence. Maybe you'd be contacted by someone from the carrier. Maybe they'd just discontinue service without warning. But eventually, someone would notice, and something would happen.

Verizon is actually becoming more honest with this move, admitting up-front that there are limits, and publishing a pricing structure.

Of course, Verizon won't be lowering their prices as a consequence, or improving their corporate policies, or otherwise not sucking. They're a telco. All telcos suck. That principle is only slightly less reliable than "there are always limits".

Re:No such thing as "unlimited"

[SirMasterboy]

Of course there are limits. My internet connection at home is 15 megabits down. So my download limit per month is 4.928 Terabytes. There is no way I could go past that.

Re:No such thing as "unlimited"

[m.dillon]

You are assuming that your internet provider will allow you to downlink at full speed 24x7, which generally isn't true. I hit up against carrier bandwidth massaging issues all the time. I've never been able to maintain full downlink rates 24x7, or anything close to full downlink rates. My uplink rate is cut in half after 10 seconds of full bandwidth use and my downlink rates are extremely variable, depending on how busy the neighborhood is.

I've also had long downlink connections cut (by the carrier's software), as in TCP RST. AT&T's U-Verse is particularly bad doing this because AT&T's routers try to track every single connection and blow up any links they've lost track of (and they lose track of links quite often).

I've been able to work around some of the issues by using a virtual network link to a nearby colo'd machine to run all my traffic through. AT&T and Comcast can no longer sniff my traffic or track connections. Comcast still caps the bandwidth, however, and AT&T's backhauls often get filled up and start dropping packets due to other traffic on the backhaul.

-Matt

Re:No such thing as "unlimited"

[SirMasterboy]

Well I assume it because with my cable Internet provider its true. They never cap or throttle my speed and I have ran it full out for more than a few days in a row before without any problem.

I've easily used 1-2 TB in a month.

Watch the back end...

[threeseas]

How to jack up your cost is easy.... just have it require more data to send the same information... you know, like additional DRM/Security,apps size, etc...) Like how to cook a frog in water... turn the heat up slowly. I remember when all you needed is 64k...

hmm

[Is0m0rph]

Well I'm still in a contract for another 1.5 years with Verizon so I guess I'll have unlimited data until then.

What's with the whining?

[Fujisawa Sensei]

What's with all the whining?

Don't the Libertarian/Capitalist ideals rule here?

Re:What's with the whining?

[Tetsujin]

Yes, and everyone here has exactly the same opinions about absolutely everything.

How about this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Verizon Customers announced today that they would be changing the price they pay for the tlak time starting June 7. They plan to be paying 9.99 for 700 min, 14.99 for 900m, and 19.99 for 1500 min.

Should be perfectly okay, right? Two parties of a contract should agree to any change int he terms. if One party can make pricing changes, why should the other party not be allowed to?

Canada

[Anonymous Coward]

Here in Canada we've always had terrible data plans. Although, we don't really do streaming on mobile devices here too much here. There's a reason I have a 16gb card in my Nexus One... and I NEVER go above 500mb/month.
Rogers Flex-rate plan: starts low and scales up based on usage:
$35/500 MB, $40/1 GB, $55/2 GB, $70/5 GB

So you're still better off on Verizon than Rogers/Bell.

Waiting for Family Plans

[Jason Levine]

As much as I'd love to get a smartphone for me and my wife, we're waiting. I just can't justify spending $30 per month for each of us. That's $720 per year that could be applied elsewhere. (And if we really start using it, that $720 a year could go to $1,920 a year.) Money's tight and I'd rather save the cash or spend it on other things.

Now, if they had a family plan. Say, pay $40 per month and get 3GB to share between all phones, I might just go for it. That would mean I'd only be paying $480 per year instead of $720 and the usefulness of smartphones might just overcome that price.

Of course, our choice might be made for us when we renew. Verizon is now requiring data plans for all but the most basic of phones. Even if we want a phone that'll just call and text, we might be forced to buy a data plan anyway.

Re:Waiting for Family Plans

[afidel]

If you're in an area where Sprint has strong coverage then you can get Virgin Mobile for $25/month, 300 minutes of voice and unlimited text and data, no other fees other than local taxes if applicable. I'm literally paying the same per year for my wife as I was when she was on a T-Mobile $10/minute pay as you go plan with obvious a lot more functionality, she's a very happy camper and I have a small, predictable bill.

Pandora will get you in trouble....

[madhatter256]

Pandora eats through my data like it's nothing and my PC at work doesn't have an audio hardware (old). If they do not grandfather me in when I renew my contract, then I will just switch back to my old-trusty motorola phone and use an MP3 player to listen to music.

Re:Questions ... answers

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahhh, but they are doing this already.

It's called minimum-usage charge. ie - if you stay under the minimum, you get the minimum charge, if you go over ooooh - sorry bub....

for $30.00 a month, we should be getting roughly 950GB of data capacity. This was calculated based on my $15.00 a month 1.5Mbit/s crappy dsl service.

1.5Mbit/S = 475.634 GB for every 28 days, which each month has at a minimum. since it's $30.00, it would be Double. For the fact that only 1 month has the 28 day minimum, they could just round up to an even 1TB of data capacity per month for $30.00. I'd be fine with the $15.00 plan at .5TB or 500GB of data.

Seems like we all ought to push back on Verizon by dropping our data plans. oh wait - I don't have one. I refuse to be raped by them. and by them, I mean by all Cellular companies charging extortionist rates for what costs them pennies a month.

Open up your router

[SeeSp0tRun]

You'd be hard-pressed to not find an open network in a city...
Open up routers, and it creates a whole list of problems for many regulating bodies.

Option B: Boost Mobile. Their phones aren't iClones, but $50 unlimited everything more than makes up for that.

Re:It's you cheap over-users that are causing this

[SirMasterboy]

I'm sorry that you think I'm a jerk for buying an iPhone with an unlimited data plan so I can listen to Pandora at work, watch Netflix on the commute and use Skype to video call my friends.

Both Skype and Netflix have received updates to allow them to run off 3G networks. Why would they get these updates if according to you 3G technology isn't meant for these uses.

10GB isn't a lot. 128 kilobit/s audio for 8 hours a day at work for 21 work days in a month is 9.7GB alone.

Again, I sorry I actually use the features of my phone.

No

[ThatsNotPudding]

and it needs to be stopped by the people voting w/their feet

It needs to be stopped by a real FCC that doesn't have a crotch that looks like a Ken doll.

Unlimited Plans

[Anonymous Coward]

It's all about the $. These company know you will go over and want to generate more money.

You can watch tv, surf, transfer, email, etc..... on a phone or devices so why would anyone want a limited plan.

Company's want more $. Plan and simple.

It won't effect most people

[m.dillon]

Most people don't run enough data over 3G or 4G on their smartphones to hit even the 2GB limit. I never have, and I run a lot of data over my smartphone.

The reason is simple: Your smartphone is connected up to WiFi most of the time, particularly when you are sitting still watching video (at home, at the coffee shop, etc), and not eating from the 3G/4G plate.

Of all the services you might use on the road, internet radio is probably going to be the biggest, but I really doubt it will be a problem for most people (not everyone, but most everyone). The price point for internet bandwidth has quickly moved more towards video distribution and further away from low-bandwidth and medium-bandwidth services. That trend will continue.

This is a non-issue. I think people have gotten a little too comfortable with this expectation of unlimited data. Nobody has unlimited data, not really.

-Matt

bad advertising

[sixsixtysix]

these caps are ridiculous. if i was sold a phone capable of, say, watching netflix streams, i would expect to stream the same quality video 24/7. if you can't support users doing that for a nice monthly fee, you need more towers. if you can't get more towers, start turning customers away, until you can meet the load. there should be some regulation for this shit, like must have x throughput for every y customers, and if you're advertising 4g speeds, then 4g throughput it is. (that is if 4g every gets official itu relegation).

Example

[Renraku]

As an example, I barely use the data features on my phone except for light web browsing if I'm waiting for something and maps when I need them while driving and I almost use 2GB. Forget about watching youtube videos or picture mail with a 2GB cap.

The scam here

[hazydave]

The all you can eat model is a great one -- you know precisely what you're going to pay, and don't feel like bandwidth is wasted. But the whole cellular industry builds their huge profits based on mistaken expected use. So it's no great shock to see the data model move that way.

An equally fair rate would be pay-per-MB or whatever -- precisely metered, just as you might pay for electricity or gasoline. As long as the per-MB fee is fair, I have no problem with it. But the telcos do -- they want me to pay for the occasional high-use month, every month. So they put up big penalties (I mean, hell, that first MB over the limit doesn't cost them one iota more than that least MB under the limit) to fear the user into paying too much on a regular basis.

I'm on Verizon today, and fairly happy with it, largely because it can actually reach my house. T-Mo and Sprint, not so much.. and that's going to the case for Sprint and T-Mo in any rural area -- they just don't have the low frequency 850MHz band to penetrate foliage well. Also why Verizon works better than AT&T -- they both have 850MHz and 1900MHz slots, but AT&T's 3G takes both, while Verizon's runs only at 850MHz though the forest.

On the other hand, given that the price going from $30/month for unlimited to $30/month for 2GB, that sure smells like they're just plain doubling the price in practical term (I have often gone over 2GB, rarely get over 4GB). For less than that doubling, I can put up a roof antenna and repeater/booster, which ought to solve the T-Mo or AT&T problem just dandy. If only they didn't suck in other ways... What we need is a new company doing a reasonably priced data-only service. Sadly, it takes a very, very long time for new companies to build out a generally useful network -- both MetroPCS and Cricket are limited to a small number of generally urban-only areas so far.

Not True

[Anonymous Coward]

Just called Verizon and they said that this info is false. They will not be dropping their $29.99 unlimited data plan. People are gullible.

In Other News

[Anonymous Coward]

Users to Drop Verizon Phone/Data Plans, and Abandon All Thoughts of Renewing Existing Contracts In Two Weeks ...what a stunning correlation. Couldn't have predicted that at all.

Nice if you already have internet.

[professorguy]

We were spending about $100 per month with Dish. Bought a Roku box for living room, put the Wii in the bedroom and got a $9 Netflix streaming plan

Wow! What an excellent idea! I don't know why I didn't think of it. I'm going to stream my TV from Netflix from now on. What a savings! Hey, it's not going to be a problem that my wi-fi connection has a Verizon Wireless Mobile USB radio (that's the only high-speed internet of ANY KIND here), right?

What wonderful shows! I could easily find 60 hours of video for the month to be streamed on my 5GB data plan (the biggest they allow). What do you mean I owe Verizon $18,543?!

Who is your cable Internet provider?

[DragonHawk]

Okay, I'm curious: Who is your cable Internet provider?

Re:Who is your cable Internet provider?

[SirMasterboy]

Time Warner 15/1 package. Yeah there is a speed boost that lasts for a couple minutes that brings me to like 25/2 but I don't count that. I always get 1.87MB/s down sustained from fast enough servers.

The largest download queue I've had was about 300GB from usenet it went at full speed the whole way.

I did hear they might be testing caps again and if that happens I'll probably switch to business class.

there was life before the facebooks and appstores

[kvnslash]

The new tiered plan sucks, but I think it's been coming for a while. The telcos *are* selling a product which has an incredibly high demand and limited resources with which to fulfill it. I don't believe for one second that everyone will be grandfathered in for their entire life. At some point they will stick you with new higher cost plans. Personally I still see smartphones as toys, they provide a lot of 'nice to have' features, nothing I can't live without.

You think those prices are high?

[Anonymous Coward]

Virgin Mobile Canada charges 6$ a megabyte for us roaming on a smartphone. That's 6144 dollars plus tax for a gig. I'll build my own cellphone towers at a price like that, jeez.

But this will never happen

[sean.peters]

it needs to be stopped by the people voting w/their feet to some new startup carrier that is smart enough to buck the trends.

Great in theory, but there are huge barriers to entry into this business - you'd have to put about about a billion cell towers. I doubt you'll see any new startup carriers. The only real solution to this is better gov't regulation.

Sprint has always been the nicest

[sean.peters]

Sprint, in my mind, has always been the kindest to their customers - I had them for years. Whereas Verizon nickel and dimed customers to death, Spring was always pretty good about having reasonable service packages. Unfortunately, their reception sucked so badly I ultimately had to drop them.

A grim irony...

[Izaak]

I am actually an Android developer that uses a Verizon MiFi as my primary Internet. With my frequent repo syncs and source code downloads, I could easily blast past a data cap. If they take away my $70/month unlimited account, I'll probably just cancel and look for alternatives.

Re:A grim irony...

[rgviza]

--I'll probably just cancel and look for alternatives.
And get stuck in a contract with a cell provider that does the same thing verizon is doing now, in a few months.

If verizon does it it lowers the bar for att and cricket to do the same thing. I'd lay a testicle on a bet that you see all of the carriers follow suit on tiered limited service. Why? no competition. You are probably better off sticking with verizon for now and seeing how this shakes out. At least you will have better service. I'm an ATT user, and am steeling myself for the same treatment...

Of course they are

[nurb432]

Get people to buy in to it, then yank the carpet out. About time for me to drop all services as anymore you can find WIFI about anywhere you want. who needs 3g data ( or voice... with voip )

Re:Of course they are

[rgviza]

good point. I use my data plan like, rarely. I send an email once in a while on it. Whenever I'm at home, or any place else just about, I use WiFi.

some new startup carrier

[nurb432]

Umm with what infrastructure? if you want any coverage at all you end up on one of the big 3 networks evenutally.

Question about upgrades

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting. I'm a casual web server; I just checked my data usage is .800 GB for the month. I'm very surprised i'm close to 1 GB, sounds like an average person like could also be impacted by the tier plan

This is my current situation...

I am currently out of a contract (been resisting upgrading for 3+ years) and i have unlimited data

If I decide to upgrade a from 3g (droid pro) to a 4g phone, will i lose the unlimited data after 7/7?

I dont want to upgrade to another 3 g phone before 7/7, then potentially lose my unlimited data if i upgrade to a 4g phone

Thanks

LMAO @ Erroneus (blown away 6x by APK)

[Anonymous Coward]

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2253808&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=36521452

How stupid do you feel erroneus? Every point you made there was blown away with valid, concrete, verifiable evidences vs. your trolling "ne'er-do-well" statements there. LOL!

Dirty Money!

[Anonymous Coward]

Ridiculous! Verizon I hope gets taken to court for there money scams! Bastards!

Answers ...

[Chrontius]

Just bought a new iPhone plan last week.

0.2 gigs: $15. Overage is $15 per each additional 200 meg unit.
2 gigs: $25. Overage is $10 per each additional gigabyte.
4 gigs: $45; includes tethering, allotment shared with smartphone usage. Overage is $10 per each additional gigabyte.

Sprint was offering twice the minutes and unlimited data for the same overall monthly cost as my AT&T bill.