AT&T: Don't Want a Data Plan for That Smartphone? Too Bad.

An anonymous reader writes "Joel Runyon recounts a tale that will be familiar to many people who have bought secondhand smartphones. After his old dumbphone died a few months ago, Runyon picked up a used iPhone. He just needed it for basic phone capabilities, and used it as such, turning data off. However, AT&T eventually figured out he was making calls from a smartphone, and they decided he needed a data plan, even if he wasn't going to use it. They went ahead and opted him into a plan that cost an extra $30 a month. Quoting: 'According to AT&T: They can opt me into a contract that I didn't agree to because I was using a phone that I didn't buy from them because it had the ability to use data that I wasn't using (and was turned off). To top it all off, they got the privilege of charging me for it because I bought a differently categorized device – even though the actual usage of their network did not change at all and I never reconstituted a new agreement with them.'"

Comments

Too bad.

[NettiWelho]

Yes, too bad, for the AT&T.

It is usually good business to do stuff that make customers want to continue using your services.

Re:Too bad.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, too bad, for the AT&T.

It is usually good business to do stuff that make customers want to continue using your services.

You're delusional.

And I'll have proof of that in a month when not a fucking thing will change, including this policy or AT&Ts revenue.

Sorry, but there are always plenty of addic, er customers in the cellular arena. These companies' new sales pitch should simply be "FUCK YOU".

Don't like it? Get rid of your cell phone. All phones will be considered "smart" on every plan on every carrier very soon. Again, part of the "FUCK YOU" commitment to feed the addicts that refuse to quit.

Re:Too bad.

[jhoegl]

AT&Ts service is crap compared to Verizon.
In fact there are many places AT&T does not work, but Verizon does.
They are small places like a club, a restaurant, or even the grocery story, but people still stick with AT&T.
Again, choices are pretty much limited in this category, so... that is why they can pull this crap.

Re:Too bad.

[aurispector]

Your sarcasm meter may need recalibrating, but you're right about the new ad campaign.

This kind of shit is exactly why people hate AT&T. I wonder what kind of language exists in their user contract that makes them think they can do this sort of thing?

Re:Too bad.

[SJHillman]

If coverage area is your only metric, then yes, Verizon is the bestestest ever. However, there are other metrics. My primary metric is cost, so I'm on Virgin Mobile in spite of the limited coverage. For some people, the extra coverage is worth the money, for me it is not.

Re:Too bad.

[johnlcallaway]

Why would AT&T want a customer that doesn't use data? Better to charge them fees and make them go elsewhere, or hope that they will start to use data. Same thing happened to my son-in-law, but I changed his plan to a $5 plan, and he does use data from time to time. So it all worked out.

Contrary to popular belief, businesses only want your money if they make more money than you cost. If you don't fit into that mold, they will be very happy you go elsewhere.

Welcome to capitalism. I have had AT&T for years, but only because the services they offer are the ones I want and am willing to pay for. Seems you and many others don't understand how that process works. Don't like it, go elsewhere. If AT&T really wants you around, they will try to keep you.

Re:Too bad.

[Lumpy]

AT&T hates it's customers. Utterly hates them. This will not change until there is any real competition. Verizon is not a choice because they are actually worse than AT&T. Verizon is like being in an abusive relationship with someone that is a BDSM freak that does not understand safe words...

Re:Too bad.

[Runaway1956]

So - unlock it. It's out of contract. Unlock the damned thing, and if anyone ever asks, then it's "I bought it this way, I don't know shit!"

Re:Too bad.

[SJHillman]

$35 unlimited data is working out pretty well. How's your $70 very-limited data working out for you?

Re:Too bad.

[irving47]

It's only illegal if it's tied to a contract.

Re:Too bad.

[desertrat_it]

I use Ting - they are a division of Tucows, use the Sprint network, are no-contract, and have reasonable monthly fees and no overage penalty (they just move you to the next tariff). I have an Android smartphone which I can use without any data plan if I so wish.

www.ting.com

Re:Too bad.

[francium goes boom]

My T-Mobile $30 a month pay as you go, with 5gb of HSAP+ 32 data is treating me very nicely. Full HSPA+ coverage for me and my standard travel area.

Re:Too bad.

[SomeKDEUser]

I am not a lawyer. But clearly, this is equivalent to allowing people to sign blank cheques in exchange for potentially nothing, without them explicitly agreeing to. How such clauses would be conscionable mystifies me. If the laws in the US allow that, and people are not outraged enough that some member of congress will find enough colleagues to put a stop to that (because a super-popular law is worth a lot of votes -- and this compensates potential losses in contributions), you guys deserve it.

Although frankly, No one deserves the North American telecom companies. Seriously. No one. I gave up on having a mobile phone at all, because I refuse to give them a single cent.

Re:Too bad.

[SomeKDEUser]

Dude, better anything than Rogers basically requires you to exist and not try.

Re:Too bad.

[dugancent]

Anecdotal.

I have great AT&T service, but I have to walk to the end of my driveway (a little less than 200 yards) to pick up Verizon, and then it's only one bar.

Re:Too bad.

[Anonymous Coward]

I work as a manager in a call center for ATT and while I disagree with my employer 90% of the time I am the guy who usually gets these type of users escalated to me. They begin with" I never asked for a data plan when I bought my LG flip phone." An I point out they are using an iphone, they usually claim they are not even though we can see it on the network, from the time they stuck their sim card in it. And most of the time they lie about it. We used to be able to lock down smartphones without any data, but the problem is that part of the data plan is used to offset the higher level of support required with smartphones, and unfortunately only about 10% of Iphone users actually no how to use them, and the rest need hand holding. I call it the George Jetson syndrome, they only have one button to press, and they whine about doing that. We started getting tons of users with off contract Iphone they were given, bought, or found, and they stuck their sim cards in them. Now these people want no data but want support in connecting via wifi to check their email, facebook, use company vpns, play words with friends, and all the neato things they can do. They want support for it, but without paying the toll. No one opted him into a "contract" he was informed for that type of device to be used on the network, he would recquire a data plan, and as such one was added. He is free to go back to his old phone.

Re:Too bad.

[camg188]

No matter what carrier your using the money is going to one of those two.

In the US, Sprint, Verizon, T-Mobile and AT&T Wireless (formerly Cingular) own almost all the cell towers and lease bandwidth out to the various mobile virtual networks

Re:Too bad.

[Eivind Eklund]

So you need to split your charges into "Smartphone support tax" and "Data plan", and not bundle them.

Re:Too bad.

[Anonymous Coward]

Be that as it may, this means of responding to that problem is incorrect. A client was opted into a plan he did not want, without his consent or even informing him of this. THAT is an egregious way to treat a customer.

If the data plan is mandatory, for the reasons you stated, clients need to know that the moment they sign up. If it is so easy to detect that they are using a smart phone, then they should get a "service denied because you are on an invalid plan" error the moment they plug their card in, so they can call support and hash that out.

That may create more friction, but it is more honest and more appropriate than the "ha! gotcha!" practices going on now.

This makes me glad I don't use AT&T.

Re:Too bad.

[mesterha]

This doesn't make much sense. If the support for data plans is expensive then just refuse to give data support for people who don't have data plans. Of course, there is the associated cost of dealing with them on the phone and refusing to help. This could be offset by offering them a minimal data plan or a data support plan.

The real reason ATT doesn't want people to use this option is that lots of people would drop their data plans. There's a lot of wifi around and many people would be satisfied with just wifi. I guess this opens up an opportunity for someone to come up with a way to get a phone to report a false id to the cell phone company.

Re:Too bad.

[s4ltyd0g]

I call bullshit, no cellular phone provider actually provides support for the handsets. It's all "you have a signal, the rest isn't our problem, see the handset manufacturer".

Re:Too bad.

[the_B0fh]

obviously they want all the money without having to provide service or goods.

So what's your fucking point?

Re:Too bad.

[cmorgan503]

I'm using ting and I hardly ever pay more than 50 a month for 3 android phones. When we were with AT&T, we were paying 110 a month for 3 dumb phones and no data.

Now, we have access to data if we need to, otherwise, we use our wifi connected to our 40/20 centurylink dsl service for data consumption

When we do use data, it's usually to look up an address or find the local papa murphy's pizza place to grab some pies on the way home. Clearly, the OPs needs are more aligned to mine than to "$35 unlimited data is working out pretty well. How's your $70 very-limited data working out for you?" I don't need unlimited data. I don't watch netflix on my 4" screen away from home, that can wait until I get home.

I guess my counter to "$35 unlimited data is working out pretty well. How's your $70 very-limited data working out for you?" would be, "If you need more than 2GB of data while away from home, seek help!"

Re:Too bad.

[SQLGuru]

To be fair, it takes far fewer towers to cover all of Finland compared to the United states.......your cell carrier would be the equivalent of one of our smaller, regional carriers.

Re:Too bad.

[Voyager529]

They begin with" I never asked for a data plan when I bought my LG flip phone." ...part of the data plan is used to offset the higher level of support required with smartphones, and unfortunately only about 10% of Iphone users actually no how to use them, and the rest need hand holding...Now these people want no data but want support in connecting via wifi to check their email, facebook, use company vpns, play words with friends, and all the neato things they can do. They want support for it, but without paying the toll....for that type of device to be used on the network, he would recquire a data plan, and as such one was added. He is free to go back to his old phone.

The correct response to this situation is, "We are more than happy to assist you with problems that your LG flip phone experiences. We can continue to give you voice and text messaging service on the iPhone you're presently using, but we cannot provide any assistance with its operation without a data plan added. If you'd like to add a data plan, I'd be more than delighted to assist you with the problems you're having with your handset".

I understand that support costs money, and that having a "support only" contract or a 'pay-per-incident' is only going to make your job even harder as half of the time will be spent arguing with customers who believe that they are entitled to free support. However, an iPhone can send and receive calls just as effectively as the basic phones in the absence of a data plan, and I don't think that automatically adding a data plan to a monthly fee of a customer who has decided to forgo both support and data service, with no ability to opt out of either, is the kind of customer policy that should be defended. He may technically be free to go back to his old phone, but that doesn't mean that it's possible - if his phone breaks and he's six months out on his contract, even another dumbphone costs $150 or more. To someone who's going to feel the squeeze of $20 a month for data service, that's a lot of money to ask him to cough up at once.

Yes, people - especially nontechnical people - are going to expect that data service and quality technical support both come out of thin air and are magically free, and I do certainly concede that this is not accurate, practical, sustainable, or fair to AT&T. That doesn't justify the fact that there is no "sudo rm --data-plan --phone-support" command for someone who genuinely wants neither. By the way, T-Mobile will let you have any service level you want as long as you either bring the phone with you to T-Mobile, or buy the phone outright instead of doing a carrier subsidy, so somehow, a carrier with a lot less money is able to do what these customers want and keep the towers running.

Re:Too bad.

[sjames]

So tell them they only get help using their phone if they have a data plan.

By that reasoning, everyone in the world is 'obligated' to have an AT&T data plan because they might potentially pretend to be an AT&T customer to get support they're not entitled to otherwise.

Honestly, if I actually needed help using a feature on my phone, the cell company is literally the last place I would look.

Re:Too bad.

[SQLGuru]

Redirect them to Apple.......if they didn't buy the phone from you, you don't have to support the use of it.

Re:Too bad.

[Skuld-Chan]

When I worked in a call center we called that "1-800-Someone-Else" when they call up for help with a smart phone they didn't buy from you - tell them to call the vendor they got the phone from.

Its called support boundaries - you have to realize what is and isn't your job to support. I'm surprised your actually a manager...

Re:Too bad.

[ak3ldama]

That is utter bull shit. You tell them they do not get support since they do not have a data plan. You learn to say no, and then you could tell them that if they paid for a data plan you could help them. But feel free to drink the company kool-aid and believe that someone needs to have a data plan when using a smart phone. From what I understand Verizon pulls this shit too.

Re:Too bad.

[TheRedSeven]

I'm with you for the whole thing, until the last 2 sentences.

My contract with my carrier consists of (roughly--there's lots of legalese in there) the following: Carrier provides A, B, and C services at X service level agreement, and I pay Carrier $YY for the privilege.

Nowhere in the contract I signed does it say that I give the carrier permission to change the services provided or add additional services without my express permission, nor does the contract say that they can charge me extra for any additional services that they may deem I 'require' at some point in the future. If you wish to make a unilateral change to my contract, I consider that a breach or a "material change of contract" that allows me to quit without penalty or ETF.

If the policy is "If you bring your own smart phone to our network and put our SIM in it, we will change your services and costs," that had damn well better be in the contract I originally signed, or it is immaterial to the agreement we have. End of story.

Re:Too bad.

[trevelyon]

I hate to say but I've read the contracts from Sprint, T-mobile and AT&T and they basically all have screw you clauses. They are customer hostile contracts and the reason I've gone to pre-paid now. It's sad but this is the face of corporate america now, bad lock-in contracts pervade so many sectors in the US now from cable (tv, phone, internet) to fitness centers. Many places now won't even let you see and take away the contract to go over it (you have to read and sign there or sign on a digital pad only to be given a paper copy that is readable after). It's simply shameful. I won't even waste my time listening to companies that don't let you properly review their contracts. If their contracts have hostile terms (allowing them to change the contract but not you) it shows even they don't believe in their quality. If they had a good service they wouldn't need such terms.

Re:Too bad.

[cmorgan503]

Then AT&T or any other provider should refuse to support these 2nd hand phones other than whats needed to connect to the service.

Wifi doesn't work? Google it.

Memory card isn't reading? Bing it.

SMS not going through, well, that's a little tricky. SMS settings might need to be changed, I imagine, if the phone was initially on another carrier. This should be up to the carrier/support.

If I was a carrier, and someone brought a phone from someone else other than me, and wouldn't put it on contract, it's reasonable to me to provide the minimum support needed to provide the basic service. For me, that would be voice services, SMS and data would cost some more. Want cheaper data and sms, then by all means, make a contract with me, and I'll provide.

Now that I think of it, I'm a corporate, I can make money off this 2nd hand phone market. I can $ell $upport for these phone$. Wifi doesn't work? $10 to fix! Memory card not reading? $5! Want a monthly $upport contract? $20 a month!

Re:Too bad.

[Cinder6]

It depends on your area. Where I live, AT&T has better coverage and is much faster than Verizon. I've also had pretty good luck with AT&T's service (though I rarely call them--but perhaps that's another point in their favor?).

This, though, is just asinine (I'm surprised it's on the front page here; I thought it was common knowledge). I wouldn't be surprised if they pull stunts like this to make buying a contract-free phone less attractive. I had intended to give my brother my old iPhone a while back, but he didn't want to pay for a data plan.

Re:Too bad.

[Solandri]

They begin with" I never asked for a data plan when I bought my LG flip phone." An I point out they are using an iphone, they usually claim they are not even though we can see it on the network, from the time they stuck their sim card in it. And most of the time they lie about it. We used to be able to lock down smartphones without any data, but the problem is that part of the data plan is used to offset the higher level of support required with smartphones, and unfortunately only about 10% of Iphone users actually no how to use them, and the rest need hand holding. I call it the George Jetson syndrome, they only have one button to press, and they whine about doing that. We started getting tons of users with off contract Iphone they were given, bought, or found, and they stuck their sim cards in them. Now these people want no data but want support in connecting via wifi to check their email, facebook, use company vpns, play words with friends, and all the neato things they can do. They want support for it, but without paying the toll.

This is entirely your fault. The carriers that is. You complain about people wanting support without paying the toll. Yet you charge people the subsidized phone monthly service rate even though they have an off-contract phone. (T-Mobile is the only major carrier who doesn't - they'll cut your monthly fee $10-$20/mo once you're out of contract and paid off the "subsidy" for your phone purchase.)

You're the one who decoupled the relationship between "service" and "toll", and turned it into one amorphous "monthly service fee". You can't act like it's all fine when it favors you (off-contract phone owners paying subsidized service rates), then in the next breath complain about it when it doesn't favor you (non-data plan users asking for non-data support for their phone). You're currently charging them a toll for a subsidized phone, even though it's not a subsidized phone. Turnabout is fair play - give them the damn support.

Re:Too bad.

[metrix007]

Virgin would be fantastic if I didn't have to use one of their phones. Since I can't use my galaxy nexus, T-mobiles $30/month is pretty darn nice.

Re:Too bad.

[shibashaba]

What a load of crap. One of the reasons I left AT&T was a few years ago they decided to opt everyone into a data plan. I had to argue with someone on the phone for a refund. Their line was they wanted everyone to have access to it the web. My phone didn't even have a web browser.

Furthermore, I can't imagine that many people calling AT&T for tech support for something as ubiquitous as an iPhone. There's nothing in the contract that obliges AT&T to provide support for devices people didn't by from AT&T. Makes for a nice cover story though.

Re:Too bad.

[EdZ]

Wait, hang on, do mobile networks in the US allow you to use data without that already being included in your contract BEFORE siwtching you over to a contract with a data connection? Because in the UK, I can put a voice & text only (well, and WAP if you're a masochist) SIM into an iPhone, and it simply won't be able to pull down data even if I ask it to.

On the 'smartphone users need more support' side of things: just don't offer support for phones not purchased through the carrier. That seems like the standard way to do things here.

Re:Too bad.

[Anonymous Coward]

Better yet, SELL SUPPORT!

The ones who need help aren't the heavy data users you are raping for usage.

Re:Too bad.

[samkass]

As the original poster replied to the first of the dozen people who suggested this... if you require a data plan for support, they'll sign up for a data plan, get support, then immediately cancel the data plan. The only way to recoup costs in a consistent manner is just require certain things for certain devices to be on the network. No one is forcing you to use either the device or the network, so you're welcome to take your business elsewhere...

Re:Too bad.

[spire3661]

And this is nothing new. Consider the cellular baseband in your phone the 'demarc'

Re:Too bad.

[JerLasVegas]

AT&T works quite well in Las Vegas where I live. I really do not travel that often so for my needs it works perfectly. That being said I don't agree with the practices of these carriers, but AT&T certainly is not the only one trying to pull stunts like this.

Re:Too bad.

[AlabamaCajun]

I will never get anything from ATT unless it's the last communication service available or I may just go to smoke signals unless they charge a dataplan on that to. I once tried ATT for internet service. Besides that fact it sucked in the late 90s they tacked on almost 9 bucks a month to that 19.99 a month service without any warning they would be added. I did expect 1 or 2 bucks in FCC charges as with all services. When I canceled before the 30 day plans as required, I was charged for the next 2 months in service and had to wait 6 months to get refunded. As soon as I can get my wife to dump the landline ATT is history. As for Verizon, I paid out the contracts and went with Virgin, just hope Sprint can remain cool though. NEVER USE ATT

Re:Too bad.

[Delarth799]

So user signs up for a data plan then gets support and cancels the plan. They would still be billed the data plan price for that month OR they have to enter into a 2 year contract data plan. They want to cancel they get to pay that nice hefty fee.

Re:Too bad.

[Gription]

It is kind of fun to see a European visitor come to grips with the size of the US. They can look at the maps but it just doesn't compute.
As an example: The driving distance between Seattle and New York is about the same as the distance from Stockholm to Tehran.

On the other hand...
The "competition" between all the big communications companies really works out to competing on how to lobby congress to keep themselves entrenched and to avoid rolling out real technical change that might cost them a dime.
Don't complain... They paid for their government. You didn't!!!

Re:Too bad.

[Macrat]

My primary metric is cost, so I'm on Virgin Mobile in spite of the limited coverage.

Virgin Mobile runs on Sprint's network.

Re:Too bad.

[eherot]

Isn't the point of a "contract" to make it impossible for someone to do this? Also, at $30/month it's hard to see how even what you describe would be a bad deal for the carrier.

And in the American mobile carrier market, surely even you must know that "take your business elsewhere" is BS. There is no competition here.

Re:Too bad.

[green1]

On the bright side, if they won't let you take it away to evaluate before signing, you have a much better case to have the contract thrown out as you obviously were not able to make an informed decision before signing (part of the basis of contract law)

Re:Too bad.

[interkin3tic]

AT&Ts service is crap compared to Verizon.

I feel right now what people who vote third party must feel when I mention that I think democrats are better than republicans...

Re:Too bad.

[green1]

If they call asking to connect to wifi with a phone they didn't buy from you, tell them to talk to whoever sold them the phone.

If it's that easy to see what phone they have, it should be even easier to see what phone you sold them and what plan they bought. "I see you bought an LG Flip phone, those don't have wifi, so I can't show you how to connect it." ... "well it's actually an iphone" ... "well sir/mam, we didn't sell you an iphone, so you should talk to whoever did. Or we can upgrade you to an iphone support plan for $X." done.

Provide support only for what the person signed up for. Don't sign them up for things they didn't want.

Re:Too bad.

[ntropia]

Wait, do this means that instead of inefficient gigantic companies, you are suggesting that in US it would be better to have smaller ones that are able to: 1) cover a smaller area but provide better products, 2) and do some real competition and not the fake one that's in place now?

By the way, I like the implicit humor in the "Europeans don't know geography" punchline.

Re:Too bad.

[green1]

Then do what my carrier already does, they only supply support for phones they specifically sold you. You want support for an iphone, but bought a flip phone? too bad, you can get support from whoever sold you the iphone, or go pay an apple "genius" to sort it out.

I don't see why the carrier should be responsible for support on any product they didn't sell you. If people really think the carrier should be on the hook for that support, then no wonder carriers hate the "bring your own handset" model!

Re:Too bad.

[DarwinSurvivor]

Exactly. When I first signed with for my current provider I brought my own phone (a phone they didn't sell). I had a problem with it (it was connecting to the wrong towers) and what it basically came down to was that they would provide the network information and how it would be set in one of the phones they did sell and it was up to me to figure out where that setting was on my phone. They also wouldn't help me fix non-cell-connection issues (wifi, boot looping, etc) unless it was a phone I got from them.

Re:Too bad.

[jythie]

Going one step further, I am on their '$100/year' plan and have been really loving it ^_^

Re:Too bad.

[chasisaac]

As someone who has two iPhones on T-Mobile for over year each they have never made us opt-in to a smartphone plan. We use out old dumbphone plan. Have a iPad Mini with Verizon and use data sharing as needed.

Re:Too bad.

[93 Escort Wagon]

Yeah, in support of your thoughts: I can state, from first-hand experience as a former AT&T pay as you go customer, their store staff have absolutely no issue telling you they don't/won't/can't support you - so I can't see why AT&T couldn't do that with smartphone users that don't want data.

However I don't blame the GP, he is stuck in the role of explaining his employer's official position. I've had to toe that line myself a few times. I'm not very good at it, unfortunately (I love to shoot my mouth off) - but when you don't toe the company line with your end users, things can get uncomfortable rather quickly.

As a side note - AT&T also requires a data plan for their pay as you go smartphone customers, even if the customer doesn't use data. They used to offer some very low cost data plans you could use alongside a 10 cents a minute phone plan, at least; but now they're forcing people into a minimum expenditure of $30/month (required smartphone+text is $25, IIRC; and they require at least their lowest data plan of $5). So I switched to T-Mobile, who has a $30/month plan that's actually a great deal for people who basically just use text and data but hardly make phone calls (on AT&T I stuck mostly to wi-fi networks, but with T-Mobile I don't bother - but I still use less than a gigabyte a month).

As a second side note - although their advertising targets older individuals, Consumer Cellular is an AT&T MVNO with some very attractive, low cost plans for people like the guy in this story. I'm considering switching my wife's phone to them - she "really wants an iPhone", but hardly ever texts, uses almost no data, and doesn't make many phone calls.

Re:Too bad.

[RatherBeAnonymous]

Why would AT&T want a customer that doesn't use data?

AT&T keeps complaining that they are running out of bandwidth due to all of these smartphone users abusing their network, and so they need to buy up all of their competitors and absorb their spectrum allotments. If they are really running out of bandwidth, they could simply let smartphone users drop their data plans.

Re:Too bad.

[Anguirel]

The old adage is that Americans think 100 years is "old" and Europeans think 100 miles is "far away".

The U.S. might be better served by associations of smaller companies that have cross-sharing deals (similar to how most small Credit Unions can allow you to use almost any other Credit Union's services without charging a fee). You still get your local-level service for your most common usage and when negotiating details, but have cross-country utility when you need it.

Re:Too bad.

[shutdown -p now]

They seemed to be okay with him as a customer when he was using a dumb phone. This indicates that the cost of servicing him was less that what they got from him in monthly fees (well, duh).

Re:Too bad.

[oji-sama]

To be fair, 38 of the states have higher population density than Finland. And the whole USA has twice the population density. One might think that more users would result in better coverage.

Re:Too bad.

[CodeBuster]

Alright, then how about this. If support costs for iphones are an issue then offer the SIM card with service to anyone who wants to pay the standard rates, without the dataplan, but charge for each support call. If users don't want to pay for each support call, they can buy the data plan with the support calls thrown in gratis. What really pisses off geeks and other expert users is having to pay $30 per month for something that we don't use or use only rarely because we're always in range of WiFi. If that doesn't work then how about offering prepay on data for those times when we do want to use it, as the toll roads do. For example, toll roads may offer a monthly "subscription" to regular users, like the data plan, but they don't refuse service to non-subscribers and offer a regular toll rate for a single pay as you go use of the road. If AT&T, Verizon, Sprint and the rest won't offer these pricing options then maybe its time to get the FCC and the regulators involved again hmm?

Re:Too bad.

[CronoCloud]

As a side note - AT&T also requires a data plan for their pay as you go smartphone customers, even if the customer doesn't use data.

Actually, they don't. I have a Go Phone AT&T Fusion without a data plan. But there's a little secret to doing that.....you can only do that if you activate the sim/phone online, NOT if you do it directly on the phone. You'll be restricted to wi-fi for data though. Only Feature phones get pay as you go data.

Re:Too bad.

[fahrbot-bot]

Verizon is like being in an abusive relationship with someone that is a BDSM freak that does not understand safe words...

Oh they understand safe words; they just want you to say them often and loudly.

• Verizon: Bring out the testicle clamps!
• Customer: Oh Crap! Flugan..basja..sbiner holzeen?
• Verizon: Do you mean Fluggaenkoecchicebolsen?

So many people misunderstand those "Can you hear me NOW?" ads ...

Re:Too bad.

[AK Marc]

We used to be able to lock down smartphones without any data, but the problem is that part of the data plan is used to offset the higher level of support required with smartphones, and unfortunately only about 10% of Iphone users actually no how to use them, and the rest need hand holding.

So someone going so far as to lie and claim they are still using an LG is calling for support on their iPhone? Sounds like a chance to sell support as an add-on, and not punish smart phone users.

At least when I was on ATT, I didn't get caught using my smartphone. Though I have no idea why they think "sneaky" users are burning so much time with support calls.

We started getting tons of users with off contract Iphone they were given, bought, or found, and they stuck their sim cards in them. Now these people want no data but want support in connecting via wifi to check their email, facebook, use company vpns, play words with friends, and all the neato things they can do. They want support for it, but without paying the toll. No one opted him into a "contract" he was informed for that type of device to be used on the network, he would recquire a data plan, and as such one was added. He is free to go back to his old phone.

So the "data" is the charge. How do you go on facebook with no data? Are millions of people with off-contract phones calling in for support on how to use their phone for WiFi? He was informed of the phone he was purchasing under the contract, but are you asserting that the contract contains penalties if a different phone is used? I've not seen that, but I don't have my old contracts handy to look. Charge more for data, if it's data support that's killer. You can buy a WiFi iPad, but not a WiFi iPhone (where you enable only phone features when not on WiFi, and data WiFi-only), but a number of people like to use it that way.

Re:Too bad.

[AK Marc]

You can't be serious. This from a company that has put rules of "you may not change your data speed more than XX times per month" for land lines. You just have a 2-month minimum for adding services. It's not that hard.

Re:Too bad.

[no bloody nickname]

To be fair, it takes far fewer towers to cover all of Finland compared to the United states

Yes, but the US also has vastly more population. And, more importantly more population per square meter.
Finland comes in at the 201st place with regards to pop density at 16 ppl per square km. The US has 34!
What the hell does it matter that the US is big? The cost is amortized over the number of end users you have.
It's not like rail or power lines where you need right of way; all you need one single location in each area for a
cell tower.

You guys have on average twice as many people in a given area who need access to cell phones and yet you
still manage to get your ass severely beat by the Finns with regards to coverage. Just accept it: Your phone
providers suck - hard.

Re:Too bad.

[jakimfett]

Yeah, and Verizon has been doing the whole "if you have a smartphone, you must have a dataplan" crap for years. I love my 'Droid, but I'm also a student, so when I got "upgraded" to an (unwanted) dataplan, it's back to the old G'Zone for me...

Re:Too bad.

[funfail]

So they lie about having an iPhone, yet they ask for iPhone support?

Re:Too bad.

[Miamicanes]

The problem is, AT&T is expensive, but if you don't really care about the cost, everyone else sucks in at least one major way:

Verizon's LTE coverage is "broad" (lots of cities with at least one spot of coverage), but "thin" (airport? Absolutely. downtown? Probably. Indoors in a fringe suburban area where AT&T has solid LTE coverage? Forget about it.) That said, Verizon has usable (if slow) coverage just about anywhere that's remotely populated, and most places that are really, really rural.

T-Mobile is awesome in the areas where they're awesome, and sucks horribly in the other 80-90% of the country. As a practical matter, if you live in a market where they're good, as long as you're in your hometown they'll be really good about 80% of the time, tolerable another 15-18%, and totally suck the remaining 2% or so. When they're fast, they're almost as fast as Verizon. When they're slow? Er... well... when roaming on AT&T, you're limited to EDGE speeds (though it appears they at least have the decency to let you connect via UMTS/HSPA, even if it's throttled, and don't LITERALLY force EDGE connections).

Sprint? OK, total epic suck just about everywhere right now, and likely to stay that way for at least another year or two. They were good up until ~3 years ago, and tolerable up until ~2, but the moment the iPhone hit, their network totally went down the shithole because most of their towers are serviced by literally two T-1 lines... one used for voice calls, control, and 1xRTT data, and one used for EVDO data. They've been putting band-aid fixes in place for the past year and adding another T-1 or two, but ask anybody with Sprint... until the day they switch on LTE and finish their NV deployment in your area, it just keeps getting worse and worse and worse every day. And just when you think it can't possibly get any worse (I was getting ~26kbps down, and ~40kbps up the day I finally walked away after ~14 years with them), you run speedtest one day and see SINGLE-DIGIT speedtest scores. And even in the cities where they've officially "turned on" LTE, their LTE coverage hasn't even gotten to where their wimax coverage WAS two years ago, so they still mostly suck.

AT&T isn't quite perfect in every way... there are areas (mostly fringe suburbia indoors, but NOT necessarily rural areas) where Verizon is slow-but-solid 1-2mbps where AT&T wheezes and struggles to do EDGE, but I've only seen a couple of them... and they're definitely the exception rather than the rule. In the western parts of urban Dade & Broward counties in Florida, AT&T totally spanks Verizon in most places. Verizon TOTALLY cherry-picks dense areas and almost completely ignores suburban areas when deploying LTE. In contrast, AT&T has LTE in fewer markets... but in those markets, pretty much the whole area is solidly blanketed with LTE.

That said, I firmly believe the government needs to forcibly break up AT&T again into at least 3 different companies: one that owns the wireless, one that owns the fiber/copper backhauls & rights of way, and U-verse. Then, the fiber/copper backhaul company would have every incentive to sell fiber to AT&T's competitors... and AT&T would be instantly stopped dead in its tracks from being able to launder surcharges and fees states agreed to 10-20 years ago to fund fiber deployments and use them to build out its wireless network instead.

AT&T's own execs have said publicly that they don't want to spend any money building or maintaining anything with wires anymore. It's time for the FCC to take them up on their offer, and force them to divest their entire wireline holdings to somebody who DOES. Not just the old copper POTS network they don't want, but the fiber runs and rights of way that go along with it as well. Right now, AT&T doesn't want to spend resources on fiber (unless it directly services one of their own towers), and they don't want anybody ELSE to be able to do it, either.

Re:Too bad.

[compro01]

It's illegal if it is or was tied to a contract.

Unless it came out of the factor unlocked, it's illegal to unlock it without the carrier's permission.

Re:Too bad.

[Miamicanes]

The problem with Ting is that their per-megabyte fees make the actual usage of 5+ gigabytes of data cost-prohibitive. They're a lot cheaper if you honestly and truly use almost no data, but if you DO use a lot of data, Ting's break-even point (compared to T-Mo/Vz/AT&T) is around 250-500mb/month. Beyond that, and you'll be looking at charges of a hundred bucks or more for data that would cost less than half as much on any other network.

Ting's data charges are kind of like mileage overage charges for a leased car. As long as you don't drive much, the lease is cheap. But if you go over, they become EXPONENTIALLY more expensive than what you'd have paid to have just bought the car with a normal loan.

Re:Too bad.

[Miamicanes]

> The U.S. might be better served by associations of smaller companies that have cross-sharing deals

Oh Jesus/Xenu/FSM, please, no. That's what mobile phone service in the US *USED* to be like 10+ years ago. You couldn't drive from Miami to fucking Orlando or Tampa, or from Dallas to Houston, and use your phone in the other city, without getting assraped by both your provider AND the local company whose network you were roaming on. Southeast Florida was PrimeCo territory, Central Florida was Alltel. Southeast Florida was BellSouth mobility, Central Florida was GTE Mobilenet. AT&T had service in Miami and Orlando, but not Tampa, Naples, or most of the Turnpike between Fort Pierce and Kissimmee. Airtouch or Voicestream (the companies that, post-merger, became T-Mobile) had flickering flames of service in parts of Miami, Orlando, and Tampa, but you were pretty much SOL in the other 95% of the state. MetroPCS was dirt cheap in Miami, but your phone was LITERALLY a paperweight the moment you left Dade+Broward+Palm Beach Counties because they couldn't roam off-network AT ALL.

The day AT&T and Cingular (formerly BellSouth Mobility) merged, customers of both cheered. Ditto, for when Verizon (formerly PrimeCo) merged with Alltel.

Half the reason Sprint became so totally dominant in Florida in the early 2000s (a lead they held up until they completely squandered it over the past year or two) was because they were the first carrier that honestly and truly allowed you to use your phone anywhere in the state (and most of the remainder of the country, for that matter) without paying a cent in roaming fees.

As bad and fucked up as American mobile phone service is today, it was UNFATHOMABLY worse 10-20 years ago. Even back in LATE 2001, I remember going to Dallas with a friend who had AT&T who couldn't use his phone there to make or receive calls without paying something outrageous like $5 per day plus 89c/minute for airtime. The nearest place where he could use his phone without paying to roam was Houston (well, maybe Austin... I'm not sure).

Re:Too bad.

[dustman81]

I use Straight Talk, which is part of Tracfone, who is owned by America Movil (their owner Carlos Slim is the richest person in the world). I bought their AT&T SIM, popped it into my iPhone 4S, set up the data APN and I was using AT&T's network without dealing with AT&T's customer service, bills or contracts. I pay $45 a month, which gets me unlimited talk, text and data (some people say their data is capped at 2GB, but I haven't had a problem). It's cheaper if you buy it 3, 6 or 12 months at time. If you own your phone outright, prepaid is the way to go.

Re:Too bad.

[Balthisar]

Every time I return to the USA I stop by the T-Mobile store and ask for a couple of Micro SIM's and a few days of air time. There's never any pressure to add data to my Phone or my wife's. When I finally repatriate, T-Mobile will be given very serious consideration, unless they do something stupid between now and then.

Re:Too bad.

[Balthisar]

In 2009 I used my fancy new iPhone instead of the company phone to call in to a meeting while connecting in Dallas. I was surprised that I was charged nearly $20 for that phone call. Then I realized: legacy circa 2001 Cingular regional calling plan, which AT&T allowed me to add my data plan to.

Re:Too bad.

[Skapare]

The correct response should be: "We did not sell that phone to you, so we are not able to support it other than enabling services and making sure those services work". Requiring them to pay for an unwanted service for device support is all wrong, and arguably illegal. If the data plan cost supports the device, then what payment supports the data plan? If they want wifi support, ask them where they are getting wifi service from. Once that is answered, tell them to ask that party for wifi support.

FYI, I never ask my carrier provider for support other than that related to my service. So explain why *I* have to pay for a data plan (if I used AT&T) without talking about what other people use. Maybe there should be a separate support plan to sell to those other people.

Re:Too bad.

[Skapare]

I claim BS on your argument. If I get my email from AT&T, yes, I'd call them if it fails. If I get my email from elsewhere, I'd call that party. I get my email from a combination of 2 servers I administer, Gmail, and GMX. I don't need to data plan on my phone if I'm not using the carrier for that.

Re:Too bad.

[Munchr]

You've never worked in a customer support call center before, have you? Average Joe doesn't care where the email/game/internet/whatever came from, they typically call the support of the device they see in front of them. If it's their phone, they call the phone company. If it's the computer, they call the computer manufacturer. It doesn't matter if they really should be calling someone else, the first call is invariably to the support of the device immediately in front of them. We're like a 411 information service, apparently. I get the most fun from people calling for support for their computer when the display is from one maker, and the pc another. Almost all of the time, if the caller is over 40, they call the maker of the display first since that is the name/logo immediately available. You might think I'm joking, but Average Joe isn't an idiot, he isn't "dumb". He needs help NOW, and simply calls the immediately obvious name first and goes from their.

Re:Too bad.

[TheGratefulNet]

$50/mo for a clear[wire] tiny little pocket mifi hotspot for a measured 6-7mbps up and 1mbps down (sf bay area). 4g ONLY, though, no other fallback. but still, no overage and no surprises on the bill. monthly and no contract.

the most surprising thing was that it was bought at frys and the salesperson actually knew their shit.

all along 280 in the sf bay area: no signal ;( but along 101, nice strong signal and unlimited (throttled, though, from what I hear) data. no voice needed as its a cell data (wimax) wan side and pure wifi on lan side. my old 3g-only phone can now get 4g speeds, as can my mobile laptop.

I did go to an att store to see if they had a data only plan and mifi dongle that was affordable. I had a nice laugh then walked out once I heard what att had to offer.

Re:Too bad.

[Darinbob]

I haven't found anyplace where AT&T does not work for voice calls. For data plans it is irrelevant because I don't use a data plan.

Re:Too bad.

[SQLGuru]

is working fine, and it works practically everywhere, including forests and islets.

The argument was that Finland had coverage all over the country, including rural areas. Population density doesn't matter when we're discussing 100% coverage.

If you're talking about the number of simultaneous calls a tower can handle, then population density matters -- and since the US carriers have to deal with twice as many calls, I'm sure the Finnish carriers would struggle just as much if you doubled their call volume.

Re:Too bad.

[TheGratefulNet]

maybe people can consider wifi-only on their phones and delegate some other box as the wan gateway?

I posted on this topic but I'll repeat: clear.com (clearwire) has a $50 4g (4g only, though, beware of that if you don't have good wimax coverage) dongle that frees your phone up from any wan service. your whole interface to the world is wifi. no carrier can even KNOW that or detect it. no charge for owning a wifi-only device. its not a phone anymore, really, then. but if you have a smartphone, it should be able to run voip.

so, get a pocket hotspot (so called 'mifi'; stupid name, I know) and have that do data. you cannot 'do voice' on a hotspot so no carrier has any business charging you for voice on a data-only router (that's all it is). it runs 7hours on a charge, is the size of an old DAT tape (look it up, lol), can be carried in your pocket or vest pocket and gives you platform neutral (linux, etc) wifi.

I've had mine a few days but so far, so good. no data caps, no extra charges and easy to configure. even the web based mgmt page is pretty ok. the syslog shows that its running a form of linux inside (of course) and its a pretty well designed little device (voyager model).

check it out. I'm a networking guy and I'm pretty impressed by the design and impl. of this little dongle thing. I am thinking of turning all voice+data off on my android and using this for all my wan/phone i/o.

Re:Too bad.

[nighthawk243]

Enjoying paying out the nose for something I can get for cheap? Also: I can jump carriers as I like without ETFs with my Nexus.

Re:Too bad.

[screwdriver]

Unfortunately it's now illegal to unlock your phone and switch providers when they decide to violate you rectally.

Re:Too bad.

[desertrat_it]

ting's android phones start at under $90...

Re:Too bad.

[cmorgan503]

My brother in law was on the sprint network. Claimed he loved his unlimited data plan and didn't want to switch over from sprint to anyone else. Until we looked at his bill, saw what he used per month on average (260MB), and compared rates to what ting wanted for similar. I believe he saw something like an 80 a month savings, just switching from sprint to ting.

Because he already had a sprint android phone, moving over to ting wasn't an issue other than paying the ETF, and that he recovered within a few months after saving a lot of money on his services.

After that I've wondered how many people there are out there, that's on some kind of unlimited plan, who actually knows how much data they use on average per month? My wife, teenager and I generally don't use data outside the house, but it's nice knowing we have access to data when we need to. Why should one pay AT&T (or any other company) $20+ a month for data they may use? It boils down to what someone needs, data-wise. If someone's going to use a lot of data, then clearly, ting isn't for them. But if they're just checking email at the store, looking for some new place to eat at downtown, or getting directions from here to there, then ting fits the bill. At least, it does for us.

Re:Too bad.

[TheGratefulNet]

am I missing the obvious, here? why even TAKE calls that are wifi related?

I see no reason to charge a customer for a service because your company can't balance its books. that's what all your words really translate to.

just don't take the call (tell him what he wants to do is not supported by YOU; go search the net for it). then hang up.

but don't CHARGE him data if he's using wifi. sheesh!

and don't spend a minute helping him.

your explanation is lame. I think you drank from the employees' kool aid cup.

Re:Too bad.

[TheGratefulNet]

I was considering att for data.

after reading this, att is now in my 'do not buy' list.

thanks slash. then again, my blacklist of bad companies is almost larger than my whitelist ;(

Re:Too bad.

[hairyfeet]

Why is this labeled flamebait and not insightful? The carriers have you by the short hairs and THEY KNOW THIS so they'll get ever shittier with their plans and fees because where are you gonna go? The other guys will simply match the douchebag policies as it makes them more $$$ and since most areas only have good service by one carrier you can take it or do without a cellphone. In my area Verizon service is hit or miss so if you don't like AT&T's policies? Too bad, its take it or leave it.

Like it or not we are at the mercy of the carriers, they can do any damned thing they want and we can't do shit but take it or do without, that's it. We see the same thing with the ISPs with their shitty caps and ever higher prices, because where you gonna go? You gonna give up your job and your home just to move to an area with "better" service that can turn to shit tomorrow without warning? of course not and they know this, so whether you like it or not the future is data plans and extra fees whether you want the service or not.

I can tell you this is NOT just about the iPhone as i went through the same shit with my dad's HTC Android phone, we got him the phone because the big screen made it easier for him to manage his phone book, he NEVER uses data on the thing, yet we have to pay for a data plan because they won't let a smartphone on their network without a data plan PERIOD.

Re:Too bad.

[Miamicanes]

Sprint is a bad example, because their network is SO dysfunctional right now, your data use on it is self-limiting by virtue of being 80kbps in most places on a GOOD day. In the months leading up to my switch from Sprint to AT&T, my Sprint use averaged 2.5gb/month (thanks mostly to wimax). Since switching to AT&T, I've gone over 3gb almost every single month. When you have 5mbps in a BAD area (usually 10-15mbps, I've seen 26mbps) and USED to get 1mbps in a GREAT area (10mbps when Sprint first launched 4g in south Florida), you can use a LOT more data without even trying.

Re:Too bad.

[miroku000]

This is entirely your fault. The carriers that is. You complain about people wanting support without paying the toll. Yet you charge people the subsidized phone monthly service rate even though they have an off-contract phone. (T-Mobile is the only major carrier who doesn't - they'll cut your monthly fee $10-$20/mo once you're out of contract and paid off the "subsidy" for your phone purchase.)

T-mobile has required me to have a 2 year service agreement to use a phone that I paid full price before. They are not consistently better about this. Maybe they have changed recently. Verizon is so much worse though. They wouldn't let me switch my data plan to a new laptop because apparently once you have a 2 year agreement for a particular device, you are not even allowed to upgrade at full price but must instead buy an additional data plan for it.

Re:Too bad.

[chrismcb]

Who says it already isn't unlocked? What does that have to do with ATT charging him for a service he isn't using.

Re:Too bad.

[chrismcb]

It is only illegal if the phone has been purchased since Jan 2013 AND if you don't own the software on the phone.

Re:Too bad.

[chrismcb]

Why would AT&T want a customer that doesn't use data?

Because they make money. They are just saying, either use a phone that doesn't use data, or pay for the data plan

Re:Too bad.

[Cimexus]

Um, this may be my non-Americanness speaking here but what is a carrier doing providing support for a handset? The carrier's role is to provide a signal. They shouldn't care what handset you're using, let alone provide tech support for it. Maybe that's why US cell plans are so expensive compared to most other places - support costs?

Bad analogy maybe but this to me seems like a TV station providing viewers with technical assistance for their umpteen dozen different brands of TV.

If I have a problem with my signal or my 3G data speeds or something, I call my carrier. If I have a problem with the phone itself (or just want to know how to connect it to WiFi/VPNs etc) I'd contact Motorola/Samsung/Apple/Nokia/etc. You guys are 'doing it wrong' from my perspective :)

Re:Too bad.

[Runaway1956]

Stop the contract. Buy a $45 dollar card from StraightTalk. Go your own way, do your own thing. Terminate the frigging contract. Don't like the service, don't do business with them. Screw ATT, and screw their rules.

Re:Too bad.

[bl968]

This is total bullshit. ATT can choose to provide tech support to the users who need it by assessing a tech support fee. Instead of charging people who have a smart phone more for the privilege. The only support I have ever asked for is paying my bill. I shouldn't be required to subsidize the stupid.

Re:Too bad.

[sapphire wyvern]

That makes no sense. If you've got a *contract* that requires you to pay the company or at least pay an Early Termination Fee to get out of the contract, why the heck would the company need to tie you down _more_ with a technical lock on the phone SIM?

In Australia, I believe only pre-paid phones usually come with network locks. If you've got a contract with a phone company *anyway*, there's no need for them to lock your phone.

Re:Too bad.

[bl968]

If they want everyone to have access to the web them they will have no problems bringing back the unlimited usage plans...

Re:Too bad.

[theshowmecanuck]

Contrary to popular belief, businesses only want your money if they make more money than you cost.

How is this insightful?! This is fucktardish. How was AT&T not making a profit off of him before for Christ's sake? You know they don't have to power up an anti-data shield power generator to turn the data plan off. It doesn't cost them anything to not provide data. And he was still paying them a monthly fee. They WERE making money off of him. AT&T is just greedy and wants to charge for a service the guy doesn't want. And it doesn't cost AT&T anything to just providing plain old telephone service. No... it doesn't. I worked for the company that created their billing system. No, it doesn't cost them anything to not provide data. For fucks sake, he was getting phone only and no data and it wasn't an issue before. So don't use the bullshit line that they weren't making money from him.

FTFY: welcome to unregulated capitalism. Where how much you pay to congress in bribes (oops I mean lobbying money) is directly proportional to what laws they will pass to allow you to fuck over your customers. Seems you don't understand how that process works, or don't want to. Maybe you should get a job as a phone company shill.

Re:Too bad.

[Fjandr]

No they won't, because the plan change requires a 2-year contract. There's no "sign up for support then drop plan" option on most carriers. The only carrier this might be an issue with is T-Mobile.

Re:Too bad.

[Fjandr]

Unfortunately, T-Mobile doesn't do that as of the last time I needed to change plans. Both phones were unsubsidized, and they informed me they no longer had non-contract plans comparable to their contract plans for the reduced rate. That's been about a year though, so maybe they regained their sanity.

Re:Too bad.

[FauxReal]

I have an iPhone on AT&T prepaid "Go Phone" service. no contract @ $25 a month for 250 minutes and unlimited text with no data plan. I barely talk on the phone and most people like to text these days anyway. It works well for me.

Re:Too bad.

[Aristos Mazer]

It does seem like -- as the phone company -- you should build a smarter phone that just routes people to the person they should be calling. :-)

Seriously though -- thank you. Yours is the first reasonable explanation of this policy I have ever heard. If anyone had actually explained this while I was on the phone with AT&T for almost two days trying to cancel my data plan, I might still be with AT&T.

Now that I understand where this is coming from, I do wonder whether it would be feasible for you to turn off the data plan only when people call in to ask to do so. At that point, you have them on the phone and can explain that after they do this, they will not be able to call for tech support again unless when they call they pay some extravagant fee that covers an entire year of tech support. I would've happily bought into that system.

Re:Too bad.

[Aristos Mazer]

See the comments from user munchr above. It is an excellent explanation of why you can't just refuse to give tech support to people.

Re:Too bad.

[SJHillman]

There is a soft cap at 5GB. There's no extra charge for going over it, you just don't have the same speed. The one time I exceeded it, I still didn't notice - even throttled back, it was still enough to do what I need it to do. If I really needed a high-speed high-cap plan, then I would pay the extra money to be raped by ATT or Verizon... but I don't so I won't as long as Virgin still gives me enough speed for email and basic web browsing even after I pass the cap.

Re:Too bad.

[SJHillman]

It's neither hidden, nor a cap. They sent out tons of warnings that they were implementing it a few months ago and you just get throttled after 5GB - there's no shutoff and no extra fees so it's not really a cap.

Re:Too bad.

[sir-gold]

You should go to a t-mobile store and ask about the "new" unlimited plan that they started offering about 6 months ago. It's $30 a month (same as 5gb plan) and it's ACTUALLY UNLIMITED, it's the same 4-8megabit speed (t-mobile g2) whether you have downloaded 1GB or 100GB (technically there is a limit, but it's 9765.62GB)

The only downside is that the "new" unlimited plan doesn't include tethering, but you can get around that by using privoxy to change your browser user agent

Re:Too bad.

[sir-gold]

that only works until the company that you fled TO (t-mobile) gets bought out by the company you were fleeing FROM (at&t), and you are back where you started, as an at&t customer whether you wanted to be one or not.

Re:Too bad.

[sir-gold]

Between at&t and verizon, they have managed to reassemble all the parts of the old at&t (by "acquiring" all the various baby bells), and managed to go right back to being the same old telecom monopoly. The only difference between today and the Ma Bell days is that now they are skirting anti-trust laws by being a two-company cartel instead of a one-company monopoly.

Re:Too bad.

[An Onerous Coward]

Of course population density matters. The cost of "handling twice as many calls" ought to be small compared to the cost of covering large swaths of empty countryside that only generate a few calls a day. In the former case, the infrastructure can be paid for by all those extra calls and customers. In the latter case, you have to maintain tons of infrastructure that is being subsidized by customers from higher-density areas.

Re:Too bad.

[sir-gold]

how you described it is exactly how its SUPPOSED to work, but not with some carriers (at&t and verizon for sure). if you don't buy a data plan and try to use data, your download works just fine, but they bill you per kb, as if it were ALL overage. You have to specifically tell then to disable data on the account if you want no data access at all. I found this out the hard way when my first at&t bill was $75 higher than it should have been (and the first bill was prorated for a mid-month signup which only covered 10 days of the billing period). In at&t's defense, they did cancel the $75 in fees for me, once I signed up for a data plan

This isn't what happened with the OPs story though, in the OP's case, they "detected" he was using an iphone, and decided that all iphones MUST have a data plan and that they could add one without even asking, regardless of whether or not the OP had ever used any data before.

Re:Too bad.

[tofarr]

Maybe you wouldn't have to give so much support if you didn't try to charge people for things they did not ask for.

Re:Too bad.

[Golddess]

Or at least tell any such customers calling up for things like wifi support that their contract does not include such support, and if they would like such support they must sign up for a data plan.

Re:Too bad.

[Andy Dodd]

This sort of shit is exactly why I'm going to no-contract service with Straight Talk when my contract is up.

Yes, I know ST is heavily affiliated with and/or owned by Wal-Mart - but as evil as Wal-Mart is, they understand that good business involves not treating the customer like shit. They're nothing compared to the Deathstar Network in terms of douchebaggery.

Re:Too bad.

[niado]

As someone who has two iPhones on T-Mobile for over year each they have never made us opt-in to a smartphone plan. We use out old dumbphone plan. Have a iPad Mini with Verizon and use data sharing as needed.

I can corroborate this. T-Mobile for some reason does not force a data plan for a smartphone while Verizon and ATT both do.

Re:Too bad.

[Andy Dodd]

Verizon is the only network worse than AT&T... Verizon pulls the same "must pay for a data plan on a smartphone" shit (they added data to my Treo 600 no less than THREE TIMES without my permission...)

On top, they're even worse than AT&T in terms of mangling their devices and locking them down. With AT&T, you can at least bring a device to their network that AT&T had no involvement with whatsoever. With Verizon, your ONLY choices are devices in their ESN whitelist database - which means only phones approved (read: crippled) by Verizon.

As much as I hate AT&T, I'll take them over Verizon any day of the week. With AT&T, at least I can own my own device. (That said, I'm switching to Straight Talk no-contract once my AT&T contract is up. Same network, less bullshit.)

Re:Too bad.

[Andy Dodd]

I still remember around that time having to call Verizon and get a *new fucking number* when I spent the summer in New Jersey. Then *another fucking new number* when I moved back to New York for my senior year of college. *yet another fucking number* when I moved back to NJ in 2002. I think it was shortly thereafter that you could finally get a real nationwide plan.

That said, in 2006, Verizon was unable to make changes to my plan because I was living in New York but had a New Jersey number. Funny thing - throughout grad school, they added data plans without my permission no less than three times. Once I was employed and had income PLUS eligibility for a 25% discount through my employer - the idiots couldn't figure out how to add data to my plan.

I left for AT&T in late 2006 or 2007 (can't remember...) and never looked back. While I'm going to leave AT&T soon for Straight Talk, I will NEVER again consider Verizon. Especially not after seeing their "we own your phone, you do not" hijinks in 2012.

Re:Too bad.

[InfoJunkie777]

On the other hand... The "competition" between all the big communications companies really works out to competing on how to lobby congress to keep themselves entrenched and to avoid rolling out real technical change that might cost them a dime. Don't complain... They paid for their government. You didn't!!!

What??? Don't taxes count? :-)

Re:Too bad.

[Anguirel]

I also remember it cost $2 to call my friend the next town over because it was considered long distance, even though I could bike there in about 10 minutes (we were close to the town line). It wasn't just the cell phone industry doing that, it was the entire telephone industry, all the Baby-Bells... Then all those tiny regional zones started getting bumped up in size, and I could call across most of the state... And then they were all bought up by Verizon and I could call cross-country. Now that the major carriers have long-distance included in even their most basic connection, even if you found a small local phone company they'd still need to find a way to offer that or customers would want to invite int he big company.

Oh, hey, how about the comparison I already made, when local banks used to do the same with ATMs - use someone else's ATM and you were charged a couple bucks by both banks, and you were lucky if your Credit Union could even use a bank's ATM with outrageous fees -- normally it was go to the actual CU office or you were SOL. I remember when having your local bank bought out by HSBC, BoA, or Chase was a good thing... until now, when suddenly everyone is all about the local credit unions, and the local credit unions got their asses in gear and set up their own cross-country ATM network. Hence the direct comparison.

I got my Verizon phone back then, because they actually had a cross-country plan, and I was moving from city-to-city while I looked for a job and I wanted a cell phone I could stick on my resume and know that the number would be valid and I could have service no matter where I ended up. Of course, all those smaller companies went out, and along with them went most of the really good deals. But... what if, instead of charging stupidly high roaming fees, those various smaller companies were forced (for example, by other companies that included both of their zones) to cooperate and instead waived fees for both sides? You could pick your favorite local dealer, but still enjoy nationwide coverage without any additional roaming fees. Wait, what if instead of corporations, they were co-ops? Cell-Phone Unions, if you will. The users of the network are the shareholders, so the charter is about serving the user's needs as best they can, rather than profit at all costs? Heck, maybe they can also partner out of country possibly, and get you world-wide coverage without extra fees, since they're small and acting as a co-op in your interest rather than a corp in their shareholder's interest. Nah, that'd be terrible... Capitalism! Rah rah rah!

Re:Too bad.

[Anguirel]

Go back up a few comments. Specifically regarding, say, the size of Finland vs. the size of the United States. If you're not in that Redneck category, I'm sure you'll figure it out.

Re:Too bad.

[MutualFun]

Same thing here, from a couple of years ago. We bought our daughter a used iPhone before she went to college, advising her to turn off Data and only use WiFi, which she dutifully did. A couple of months later, I noticed we had a new $30 data plan added. Calling and complaining made no difference. She had an iPhone so therefore, according to AT&T she had to have a data plan. Sucks and since I have a pretty good discount rate otherwise due to my relatively large employer, it is hard to switch. But it still sucks. She has WiFi all over campus and doesn't need the Data plan.

Re:Too bad.

[cthulhu11]

I had Verizon service in the past with a Motorola RZR. Lots of dropped calls and dead zones. Ongoing billing issues too and the CSO was distinctly not my friend. My experience has been that the providers all suck. Switching providers means buying new phones and dealing with differing service anniversaries within a household. Given this, what reason do I have to leave AT&T and lose my unlimited data plan forever?

Re:Too bad.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually I happen to know a Verizon Western Territory VP and although he wouldn't go on record we had a long discussion about the differences in service.

His take: voice service is basically a wash in coverage. 3G and 3G+/H+ are basically a wash in coverage but that ATT's version is actually faster than Verizon's. Verizon's 4G and LTE service is much wider spread but he expects ATT to catch up fairly rapidly and their services are very similar in throughput.

Re:Too bad.

[Dextrously]

Just pray you never have to call them for support though, am I right? My wife and I run on Virgin Mobile as well. I bought her a new phone recently and we made the unfortunate (and undocumented) mistake of turning on the new phone before her old one was deactivated. It took us 3 days and calling literally 9 different people before one of them was able to make the magical change to her account that fixed it. She was about ready to just send it back at that point.

But yeah, coverage isn't something I care about either. I rarely use my phone for anything other than notifications, email alerts, calendar alerts, waking my arse up in the morning and making sure I take my lunch break. That's about it. Also, I can't stand the thought of being locked in to a contract. Freeee-dom! sorta.

Re:Too bad.

[uninformedLuddite]

I am not sure why you are posting as AC. Don't you want your management to know who it is fellating them on the Interwebs?

Re:Too bad.

[uninformedLuddite]

I'm surprised your actually a manager...

I'm not. Read his comment again. It's not his abilities or his knowledge. It's his ability to hold his breath for three minutes and he swallows.

Re:Too bad.

[uninformedLuddite]

Actually it's only illegal if you get caught.

Re:Too bad.

[nobodie]

Att and tmobile have SIM cards that I can change out when I go overseas. So I use prepaid here in the US, if I want data I use wifi. That's it.

Re:Too bad.

[BeansBaxter]

Verizon is not a choice because they are actually worse than AT&T. Verizon is like being in an abusive relationship with someone that is a BDSM freak that does not understand safe words...

I laughed out loud. It really is the best description I've ever read. I do not miss them Sam I am. I do not miss Green Verizon and their plan.

Re:Too bad.

[celsiusrising]

Yes, too bad, for the AT&T.

It is usually good business to do stuff that make customers want to continue using your services.

AT&T would do well to remember that there are other phone companies that actually incorporate customer service into their offerings. (To some degree at least) The most wretched award goes to metro pcs, however, and I could tell you stories about them that you wouldn't believe...I'm using Straight-talk now, and they are actually not too bad.

Re:Too bad.

[jsm18]

I second this. My wife has a iPhone 4S on AT&T using their prepaid GoPhone service. For about $10 a month, she gets 200 texts and 50 voice minutes. Clearly she isn't a power-user, but with the abundance of WiFi available (home, work, Starbucks) she doesn't notice the absence of cellular data.

Re:Too bad.

[SemperUbi]

I'm liking Virgin Mobile a lot, and I've had their unlimited data plan for two years now. I would love to know how much market share they've picked up since then. Anyone know?

Welcome to...

[OpenSourced]

...your new serfdom.

Re:Welcome to...

[Linktwo]

...your new serfdom.

... this is your leigh, and you must do everything he say. bound to the company and not allowed to leave or marry without the corporate lord's permission

Re:Welcome to...

[vokyvsd]

"I have altered the details of our arrangement, pray I do not alter it any further."

Hmm, now who said that?

Re:Welcome to...

[Midnight Thunder]

Are there any laws in the US that allow you to break contract for free if you don't agree with the newly enforced 'contract', that you didn't sign?

I am sure there should be laws anyhow on changing terms of service if the customer didn't agree to them?

Re:Welcome to...

[Anonymous Coward]

IANAL, but I'd imagine the contract probably specified this (maybe not directly) and/or he probably could have stopped using it within a certain period of time to not be bound by the terms. Same thing happens all the time when they change their privacy policy. If you read it carefully you have the option within something like 60 days (I think it was the last time I read one) to close your account without paying an early termination fee but if you don't you are deemed to accept the news terms fate that point. I've no idea if that's ever been tested in court, though.

Re:Welcome to...

[Anonymous Coward]

"I have altered the details of our arrangement, pray I do not alter it any further."

Hmm, now who said that?

Every single utility or other provider of a regularly paid service who leaves a clause in their contract that allows them to change the terms so long as they provide some form of notice (e.g. text buried in page 6 of your bill) and which you accept by continuing to pay for the service.

Re:Welcome to...

[Gaygirlie]

If you're a woman, instead of pressing that reply button, why not just go make yourself useful and pleasure a man?

Pfft, why would I? Pleasing other women is a much more fun and useful use of my time!

Re:Welcome to...

[Anonymous Coward]

When I cancelled my old AT&T plan, after several months of incorrect charges, I just told them I wasn't going to pay the cancellation fee because they voided the contract when they failed to provide me with the service I paid them for. The whole conversation lasted about 5 minutes and they didn't charge me.

Re:Welcome to...

[tinkerghost]

Funny, when I did a normal early disconnect, they charged me for the early termination 3 months in a row and then terminated my service with a 4th early termination fee for not paying the other termination fees.

I was told to straighten it out, I would have to pay the whole thing then file a complaint to get the extra back. They still call me every couple of years looking for their money.

Re:Welcome to...

[QuantumRiff]

The original poster was not under contract. Had not been for years. However, yes. When they make a material change to their prices, you can usually cancel without the ETF, since they made a material change to the contract.

Re:Welcome to...

[Cederic]

Which in the UK is completely unenforceable.

You put my monthly fee up by 2% each year, that's reasonable and may be supported by the courts. Hell, I'm not even going to take it to court.

Put my bill up by $30/month and I'm not only going to refuse to pay, I'm going to hold you to the original terms whereby you give me service at a reasonable price. The courts will look very favourably on that approach.

Re:Welcome to...

[Voyager529]

"I have altered the details of our arrangement, pray I do not alter it any further."

Hmm, now who said that?

The guy who built the Death Star. It explains AT&T's logo...the blue color was just to alleviate a trademark dispute.

Re:Welcome to...

[maztuhblastah]

Are there any laws in the US that allow you to break contract for free if you don't agree with the newly enforced 'contract', that you didn't sign?

Yes. Or rather, since the US has a "default allow" policy with regards to rights: no, there are no laws forcing you to stick with a contract which has changed substantially.

Furthermore, AT&T's practices (in this case) extend to pre-paid and month-to-month service as well, for which there is no contract.

Re:Welcome to...

[Gaygirlie]

Just the exact opposite of the way nature intended it.

Hardly. In nature there's plenty of homosexuality, especially so among bats and penguins, and they're not homosexual because we have made them that way; they are homosexual because, well, that's their nature. As such it must be seen that the nature "intended" for these races to experience both heterosexual and homosexual traits. (As if nature could actually intend anything. It's not a sentient entity.)

No (non-hermaphroditic) animal species an this planet would ever survive to evolve and live on if all of their members were gay.

And? What's that got to do with anything I said? I didn't advocate for everyone to suddenly turn gay, all I said was that _I_ enjoy making other girls squirm in pleasure. Feel free to be boring in your hetero-normative world-view.

Re:Welcome to...

[mrchaotica]

Wouldn't AT&T try to claim in this case that it was the customer who broke the contract by swapping phones?

Regardless, it would be worth breaking the contract (even at the cost of a termination fee) just to get the Hell away from AT&T and switch to either T-Mobile or an MVNO that uses the AT&T network.

Re:Welcome to...

[chrismcb]

There is no contract.

Re:Welcome to...

[Nomuerto]

"I have altered the details of our arrangement, pray I do not alter it any further."

Hmm, now who said that?

The guy who built the Death Star. It explains AT&T's logo...the blue color was just to alleviate a trademark dispute.

The guy... who built the Death Star. With his BARE HANDS. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsW9MlYu31g

Re:Welcome to...

[sir-gold]

Wow, off-topic AND extremely sexist

Maybe you meant to post to 4chan and got the browser tabs mixed up?

Re:Welcome to...

[Farmer Pete]

Sucks to be your credit score. I agree that you got screwed, but there has to be a solution that doesn't involve stiffing ATT.

Re:Welcome to...

[MutualFun]

"I have altered the details of our arrangement, pray I do not alter it any further."

Hmm, now who said that?

The guy who built the Death Star. It explains AT&T's logo...the blue color was just to alleviate a trademark dispute.

I believe he meant your had the tense in the quote wrong. "I am" vs. "I have"

It ought to be illegal

[mcgrew]

Too bad the corporations own the government, needed laws restricting companies from screwing over customers no longer get passed here. More corporate rights, fewer human rights.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[JWW]

Yep. It makes you think - Why do so many industries way of operating today look like organized crime?

Re:It ought to be illegal

[jbolden]

AT&T is regulated by the FCC. The contract has a termination clause which generally works out fairly close to a fair price for the subsidy he got on his original phone. The policies are regulated by the FCC and the FCC agrees.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[fustakrakich]

Good to know who the FCC works for... This isn't regulation. It's a protection racket.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Slicker]

Giving up cell phones will affect almost anyone in modern society. No--there is no realistic option of just not buying their service.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[houghi]

Legal and moral are two different things. It is legal what is happening. It is still wrong.

From Wikipedia: The FCC works towards six goals in the areas of broadband, competition, the spectrum, the media, public safety and homeland security.

So it isn't an organization that has the consumers interest at heart, And in this case, they have not.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Anonymous Coward]

From someone who doesn't have a cell phone now and doesn't intend to ever get one, why do you HAVE TO HAVE a cell phone? Exactly what does a cell get you that you cann't live without?

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Archangel Michael]

We don't need more laws, we need more honor. You cannot legislate honor. The problem is, honor is an outdated notion that is contrary to "law".

Honor is doing what is right, no matter what, even when nobody is looking. Too many people want to screw the next guy and get away with it that we need laws to stop them from doing the wrong thing. They are brazen in their deeds. Quoth the asshole, "it isn't illegal, that makes it okay"

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't, it doesn't affect you, so shut the fuck up.

Mind if I rob your house then? I'll just take $30 worth of stuff every month.

Aww, what's that, you're going to run whining to mommy government if I take $30 from you? waah waah waah little baby, shut the fuck up.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Anonymous Coward]

Not surprising, as there is a whole generation stomping around that think Gordon Gecko was the hero of the story...

ovo -hoot

Re:It ought to be illegal

[TheP4st]

close to a fair price for the subsidy he got on his original phone.

The original phone was from 2008 and nothing in the article states that it ever were subsidized. His "new" phone was bought second hand and out of contract.

FTA

Obviously, if you get into a contract with AT&T from buying a subsidized phone, you have to have a data plan – I get that – that's the concession you make when you sign up for that 2 year contract. But, I bought mine second-hand, out of contract, turned off data, didn't use it and had no intention to in the future.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[peragrin]

you do realize the only reason the banks collapsed was because they built a pyramid scheme out of mortgage insurance and their bottom most layer collapsed in on their greed.

It is why they were all able to pay their bills so fast. They only had to cover short term operating expenses

Re:It ought to be illegal

[jbolden]

I'd say the FCC represents the enlightened self interest of the carriers. They represent consumers in so far as carrier's short term interests could choose them to do things to consumers to negative that they harm their long term interests.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[jbolden]

Well then he can terminate the contract without penalty at will. Both he and AT&T are on a month by month situation.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Mike Frett]

I don't own one either and It wasn't convenient for me when I did own one, it was down right annoying. Nobody ever had anything to say except BS I didn't care to hear. I honestly don't any interest in hearing peoples opinions and gossip anymore over a phone. I usually reply or post on the Internet, but I rarely come back to check after I post because I know it will be people cursing at me, telling me I'm an Idiot or some other form of abuse. I figure, posting is sort of like therapy, I post it and feel better for letting it out; not worrying about checking it again. People can read it, mark it as Troll or whatever, It's not a concern of mine if It's marked down or disagreed with.

If it comes to the point where nobody can see me posting anymore, It doesn't matter to me. All that matters is that it was posted and I feel better. As for phones, I have hung up many times on 'friends' who just continuously talk about absolutely nothing. I have better things to do than read or listen to all that. No I'm not an ahole, in person you would probably be surprised at how nice and generous I am. It all comes down to real life things that are important, not phone calls and Internet postings.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[KiloByte]

From Wikipedia: The FCC works towards six goals in the areas of broadband, competition, the spectrum, the media, public safety and homeland security.

Here's why. You're comparing a corporation that's merely organized crime with a government agency that has ties with Gestapo.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Gaygirlie]

Exactly what does a cell get you that you cann't live without?

Access to emergency services and to other people when you're not at home and something bad happens. Having been in such a situation multiple times atleast I refuse to go anywhere without a working cell phone.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Phrogman]

Corporations have no honour, and never will. Their sole purpose is to make more money for those who own them, or their shareholders. They know no morality if that will limit profits.

The phone companies have us all by the short and curlies and can do whatever the fuck they want. Up here in Canada they are all essentially the same - they charge too much, for too little and they have a monopoly effectively, with zero real competition. Like the cable companies I am sure they collaborate to keep the prices artificially high.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Anonymous Coward]

Translation: "I'm better than you because I can live without being shackled to an electronic device that most of the world deems to be fairly useful. Now I shall smugly ask you why you *have* to use a cell phone."

I'm guessing you're also one of those people that say, "Oh, I don't own a TV. I read."

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Secret Agent Man]

Having a phone while driving my car is probably the biggest advantage. I barely use my prepaid cellphone, but the ability to call people when not at home, work, etc, having a consistent number to reach me, etc, are all good reasons. You can have a cellphone without spending hours a day on it, texting and talking away.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Cederic]

I don't know how my mother is, haven't heard from her since I blacklisted their email address in response to them entering my email address into a website.

I'm certainly not going to call her. I use my phone primarily as a 'net access device, and I can live without that or use wifi. I'm certainly not beholder to its telephony functions, or SMS. They're convenient and I use them, but it's not sufficiently justification to let someone fuck me over.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Anonymous Coward]

I have no land line. Literally. I gave it up for a cell phone becase I get unlimited calls (and each of the family members live out of state) and unlimited text (which is my primary means of communication with my acquaintances). It is far easier to text all my coworkers with an update than calling each individually. Likewise, they know when I am off work to not call me; send me a text, and I will see it when I get around to it.

Do I HAVE to have one? No. Does it improve my personal life? Yes. And isn't that what technology is supposed to do?

Re:It ought to be illegal

[stenvar]

Business has never operated "honorably". What keeps businesses in check is the ability to walk away and do business with someone else. That's called a free market. Government ought to encourage that and use its regulatory and legal power to enforce it. Unfortunately, both parties have done their best to kill free markets and choice.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[mikael]

My parents wanted the ability to call me at any time - they really got annoyed that I wasn't going around with a mobile while downtown or going to work by bus.
Some workplaces want to know when you are being held up in traffic and won't be able to get into the office for an early meeting. Being able to call a taxi or emergency services is a big help, especially when there are no longer telephone boxes. Other employers are using Skype to handle IRC style discussions that don't require reserving meeting rooms.

Having a smartphone helps you navigate your way round a new town with unfamilar streets. The Google maps have helped me avoid getting lost several times. The worst time before I had the smartphone was when I went for dinner into a Burger King with entrances on two corners of the building, and ended up having my return path rotated 90 degrees, ended up in a completely different area of the city.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Jmc23]

Left-Karma-Right

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Outtascope]

I can LIVE without indoor plumbing. I don't HAVE TO HAVE a flushing toilet. I guess that means it is OK for DPW to charge me $3000 per gallon of waste, right? Since I don't HAVE TO HAVE it? Not much of an argument that (and some people are required to have cell phones for their jobs, myself included).

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Anonymous Coward]

The trick is to not give out your phone number to everyone. Or, you know, just don't answer. For some strange reason people are slaves to their phones. If somebody calls and you don't want to talk to them, don't fucking answer! It's so crazy it just might work.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently you don't realize that corporations don't do anything on their own - they are driven by people: chairman, board of directors, VPs, directors, employees, shareholders, etc.. Each one of those can demonstrate integrity or abdicate by pretending that they don't contribute to the overall corporate culture. Each one has a degree of accountability.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[big_e_1977]

Buy a yourself a used cell phone. Don't activate it. You still will be able to call 911 due to a federal law that forbids cell phone companies from blocking 911 calls from inactivated cell phones. If you have to call friends and family instead of 911, then it is not life or death matter and nor truly an emergency.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Anonymous Coward]

We don't need more laws, we need more honor. You cannot legislate honor. The problem is, honor is an outdated notion that is contrary to "law".

It's not contrary to law, it's contrary to many corpo-humanoids view of how to maximize profit.

For instance, recently Wells Fargo decided to alter my banking plan so now I have to pay them $7 a month for them to hold on to my money, which they still use to invest and make money off of like banks have always done. Now some apologists will say, "Hey, they need to maximize shareholder value." But the thing is, dicking over your customers only maximizes profit within a certain region. After that, not only are you losing money but you're unnecessarily being a dick. WF is going to get a few months of fees from me, and then lose me as a customer forever. While they won't miss my small amount of cash savings, they might feel worse about missing my couple-orders-of-magnitude-larger investments as well as short term holdings they'd have access to from my brand new small business. I'd already opened an investment account with them and never funded it, and now I never will.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[big_e_1977]

Bad argument. The lack of sanitary water and sewer services are responsible for countless deaths in the developing world. You have to have a flushing toilet because you simply can't take a crap into pot and throw it into the street because that will spread filth and disease. If too many people throw their feces in the streets we will start having cholera outbreaks in the United States again. Same deal with an outhouse, the water runoff from your property will be contaminated. For those anti government types that say "people don't need government regulated utilities, I've got a well and a septic tank", think again. In most areas, you must get a permit for your well and septic tank to ensure that you are not polluting the groundwater, nor are you drinking polluted groundwater.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[pagedout]

Translation: I wants what I wants when I wants it, and its none of your business.

Which is true, right up until you have these morons saying its a necessity of life. At that point they are usually trying to get me to pay for it in some indirect way or to commiserate with them over spending their money on silly things.

Its not that people are better if they don't have cell phones or watch TV. Its that people who can identify wants versus needs will end up better, all things being equal. We tend to save for the future instead of spending everything right now. We tend to save up for things instead of buying them on credit, giving us more money. We tend to strive to be happy with what we have not be unhappy with what we don't have.

Given the average cable bill is almost $70 and the average bill for a cell phone is $47 a person we can see on these two WANTS alone a family of 4 would spend $258 a month or $3,096 a year. With a median income of $45k (in the US) it seems to some of us very odd that someone would pay 7% of their net income on a phone and an idiot box.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States
http://redtape.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/19/15219831-newest-family-budget-killer-its-the-300-cellphone-bill-readers-say?lite
http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2012/02/your-guide-to-cutting-the-cord-to-cable-tv-updated-2012-edition052.html

Re:It ought to be illegal

[spire3661]

Its a pocket computer on par with Star Trek Scifi, and you dont understand how people find that compelling?

Re:It ought to be illegal

[phantomfive]

Problem is, different people have different ideas of what honor means. To seem people, it means, "it's ok to rip them off if they're rich." To others, it means, "it's ok to rip them off if they're happy about it," and to others, "we're not ripping them off, if they didn't like it, they'd go somewhere else."

Re:It ought to be illegal

[phantomfive]

Because when you're out on the freeway and your car breaks down, it's better to call than waiting for highway patrol to come find you.

Also, it's cheaper than a house phone if you have pay-as-you-go.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[canadian_right]

In most of the world it IS illegal to bill people for goods or services they did not ask for. A large telecom outfit tried that up here in Canada a few years back and got sued into oblivion.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[shutdown -p now]

This stuff should not be regulated by the FCC. It should be treated as a loan provided to purchase a phone and then paid back, and the company provided it should be regulated in exact same way as any other commercial organization that hands out loans. In particular, the loan should be distinct from the phone (i.e. you should be able to unlock it immediately after purchase - but you still retain the obligation to pay out the loan).

Re:It ought to be illegal

[jbolden]

I have problems with "should". This could create more openness. Leasing or lending customers equipment has always been differently regulated than pure lending. If GM issues a lease on a GM car it isn't subject to the same scrutiny as if BofA does. Banks are not supposed to be making unprofitable loans but inside leasing companies may choose to. My car company issues a lease with a negative return to even out their production and thereby cut their average cost of production for cars and increase their bottom line throughout the year. You could argue they should be forced to disclose that they are essentially cutting the price several thousand dollars, not really giving me a special lease. And I guess I could see that in the name of full disclosure. But given how few people understand leases, I'm not sure it would matter.

Take for example the iPhone under Verizon. Verizon pays out $420-480 depending on price. Their collateral if you default is $350. That wouldn't be tolerated from the FDIC or SEC. But the FCC understands that people who spend $199-399 for a phone on an expensive data plan are good customers in other ways and Verizon is fine with being on the hook $70-130 to land them. They are fine losing money on the loans.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[zugmeister]

As freelance IT, it's the best way for a customer to reach me with an immediate problem. Outgoing, it saves me a huge amount of time taking care of business (with a headset) while I'm driving to/from clients. It's an excellent way to coordinate with your team when you're on site and have to work together while in different parts of a building. It's a vitally important tool I use to make my living.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Gaygirlie]

If you have to call friends and family instead of 911, then it is not life or death matter and nor truly an emergency.

You've never heard of rural areas or other such where it takes longer for the ambulance to get there than friends or family, have you? Especially when time is of the essence and every second counts? Also, knowing how occupied emergency services are I much prefer to get to the hospital on my own if I can. Oh, and being able to call your employer you're not going to be able to get to work? Calling your friends to come and take care of your pets? Calling your kids that you won't be able to come and pick them up? Letting your partner know that you won't be able to come home and he/she must be able to handle things on his/her own? There's PLENTY of reasons to have a cell phone.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

Did you actually read the summary?

The problem here isn't termination - the problem is that he has a paid-for smartphone, and in order to connect it to AT&T's network he's being required to pay a data fee every month - even though he doesn't need or want a data plan. Other providers have told him the same thing would happen if he connected to their networks.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[UltraZelda64]

You are right. I have lived just fine, and so did my family, back before cell phones became big. We had a standard home telephone line and it was plenty. Sure, we had to actually *gasp* plan things back then and when something was decided major changes couldn't easily be made. If a call was expected at a certain time, we had to make sure someone was at the house to answer it. And there was always a wired telephone in the kitchen, guaranteeing that if all else fails at least one phone would work at all times, no battery needed. Put simply, we had to actually *think* back then... I know using your brain is almost a crime these days. The one glaring advantage a cell phone would have provided at the time in addition to the standard line is as an emergency phone, in case of an accident or car trouble while on the road. That was really about it.

Now, honestly, for the most part a standard telephone line would still be enough in most cases... but I'm on my own now. I sure as hell won't "lose" a standard telephone and my service with it or have it stolen; it never even leaves the house. But if I'm not home, I won't get any potentially important calls; I'll have to rely on CallerID when I get back, and maybe an answering machine. These days cell phones act as miniature computers, so they're also good for non-phone functionality (data entry, quick basic research, GPS, etc.), but their batteries are a bitch and the constant need to recharge is a pain in the ass. On top of that, the major providers' plans are all a joke.

Really, I can imagine one day getting basic home phone service again myself, having an everyday cell phone, and a work/backup cell phone. I'd primarily use the home phone when I'm at home, take the work phone with me to work and use sparingly, and take the main cell everywhere else I go. I intend to use Google Voice to tie them all together. It sounds like Ting's cellular plans are sane enough that I might just be able to pull it off... here's hoping that they don't end up like the rest, with fucking their customers up the ass the number one business priority, but so far they sound great. And maybe VoIP, I currently use Google's free calls to talk to people and save my ridiculously low number of minutes.

Cell phones provide a long list of conveniences of their own, but home phones provide conveniences beyond what a cell phone can privide. For example, even a cordless home telephone is more conveniently accessible and less likely to lose, since they typically come with a recharge cradle, to set on the table, permanently plugged in. There is no stupid little cable to deal with (and lose) every few days, getting it back out just to plug the phone back in... but get a wired telephone and you'll have unbeatable reliability and never lose the thing or worry about batteries again. And most likely have cheaper service than any major cell carrier.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[skine]

Exactly what does a [thing] get you that you cann't live without?

If this is really your philosophy in life, then I would expect to find you living off the land and sleeping under the stars in the near future.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Skapare]

From someone who doesn't have a cell phone now and doesn't intend to ever get one, why do you HAVE TO HAVE a cell phone? Exactly what does a cell get you that you cann't live without?

Compliance with family and friends that expect you to have one because "everyone" does. Now maybe YOU don't have the kinds of family and friends that expect that. Most people do these days.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Waccoon]

Saying honor is outdated suggests that it was once important. Where was the honor when factories were chaining their doors shut so the workers couldn't leave until the end of the day?

What's outdated is the idea that people can have a life outside of the network of toys and gadgets. Sure, you can take away my rights and freedom, but please, please don't take away my entertainment!

I'd like a smart phone, but I won't buy one in their existing form. Too much money, too much bullshit. I'm happy with a dumb phone for now.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[dasunt]

You've never heard of rural areas or other such where it takes longer for the ambulance to get there than friends or family, have you? Especially when time is of the essence and every second counts? Also, knowing how occupied emergency services are I much prefer to get to the hospital on my own if I can. Oh, and being able to call your employer you're not going to be able to get to work? Calling your friends to come and take care of your pets? Calling your kids that you won't be able to come and pick them up? Letting your partner know that you won't be able to come home and he/she must be able to handle things on his/her own? There's PLENTY of reasons to have a cell phone.

So get a cheap $30 pre-paid phone and put $30 on it every 3 months. That's a yearly cost of $150 for the first year, and $120 for every year after that. You'll only have 160 minutes every 3 months. But for emergency calls, it should be good enough. And it's $12.50/mo.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[Gaygirlie]

Is that supposed to be a rebuttal of what I said or what?

Re:It ought to be illegal

[chrismcb]

The "subsidies" on his phone ran out like 4 years ago.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[jbolden]

OK then everything is month to month. So what's the problem?

Re:It ought to be illegal

[tsa]

Of all the types of people on the planet only nerds think like this. I find that fascinating. Why is it that people who can think extremely logically really hate phones but often can talk to people face to face about many different subject, not all of them having to do with logic?

Re:It ought to be illegal

[blorg]

Why do you need the computer you posted that on? Ridiculous argument. At root you don't 'need' anything more than enough food to keep you alive and some basic shelter from the elements (may even be optional depending on the climate.)

Re:It ought to be illegal

[sir-gold]

Until we start banning FCC employees from EVER working for telcom companies or telecom lobbies (after their term in office is over), we will never have an objective FCC that actually follows it's mission statement.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[sir-gold]

Just "walking away" stopped being an option the moment that corporations realized it was more profitable to gouge the existing customers (and underpay the workers) and use the resulting profit to simply buy-out the competition, instead of actually attempting to counter the competition's offerings. (why fight them, when you can just pay them to stop fighting you)

John's hardware store is closer to your house but charges too much for tools, so you shop at Bob's Hardware instead. But today you arrive at Bob's and the sign on the door says "going out of business, early retirement", with a crew on the outside changing the neon sign to "John's hardware" and another crew on the inside re-stickering all the items to a higher price.

If these were just mom' n 'pop places, and Bob was the sole owner, then Bob might have a problem with closing his pride and joy (and his children might have an issue too, if they were expecting to inherent the store). But if "Bob's Hardware" is nothing but a publicly traded company, then the only thing the "owners" (shareholders) care about is converting their "Bob's Hardware" stock into some marginally more valuable "John's Hardware" stock. (Assuming the shareholders even know about the merger, and it's not some investment firm making the decisions for them)

You really want a free market? Get rid of wall street, get rid of stocks, get rid of "wealth management" firms, and get rid of publicly traded companies where the decision makers are kept completely isolated from the consequences of their decisions. How can you tell what is the "right" thing to do with a business, when you have never been within 500 miles of the business? Or even worse, aren't even aware that you own it, because you have a "wealth manager" handling all your stocks.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[stenvar]

You really want a free market? Get rid of wall street, get rid of stocks, get rid of "wealth management" firms, and get rid of publicly traded companies where the decision makers are kept completely isolated from the consequences of their decisions.

Well, that's kind of killing the goose that laid the golden eggs, because like it or not, a lot of that economic machinery is keeping us wealthy. In principle, corporations and stock work reasonably well; it's the political corruption and rent seeking that needs to be kept in check.

It would be sufficient if investors actually lost their money if they made bad choices, and if corporate officers were held responsible if they misbehave. It would also help if the government didn't create as many and as strong artificial monopolies (spectrum, patents, copyrights, etc.), didn't create as many barriers to entry (safety regulations, drug testing, etc.), didn't engage in as much corporate welfare, and didn't bail out failing companies and banks as much in order to "save jobs" and "save the economy". Unfortunately, Obama has been even worse in those regards than Bush or his predecessors.

Re:It ought to be illegal

[jbolden]

I don't know that the FCC is particularly bad, they are meant to be business friendly. But this concern to government regulators in general. I think we need to start having two types of government agencies.

Good cop agencies where people flow back and fourth rather freely.
Bad cop agencies where people are firmly on the regulator side and if they leave government leave for work outside the companies being regulated.

First post!

[shine]

Finally got it!

Re:First post!

[tsadi]

Holy UID Batman! If you never got first post when you were just competing against 1,501 other users, I don't think you'll ever get it now.

Re:First post!

[Rick Zeman]

Holy UID Batman! If you never got first post when you were just competing against 1,501 other users, I don't think you'll ever get it now.

For all you know there are still only 1501 users!!

Re:First post!

[CronoCloud]

We are all CowboyNeal.

Non story here.

[Anonymous Coward]

Every contract needs two parties to agree. If he didn't legally accept the terms of the current service then he can stop paying for it. Might also help to move to another service.

Re:Non story here.

[Slicker]

Every major carrier instituted this policy right about the same time. The first thing I did, was try to change carriers.... before filing an FCC complaint. I really want to fight those bastards.

Re:Non story here.

[Slicker]

Furthermore, the representatives of each carrier explicitly told me that the policy was instituted by them all at about the same time. They were clearly aware of this, collectively.. They clearly wanted to take aware our option of switching to another.

Re:Non story here.

[Spiked_Three]

But you will never win. There is now a corporate department tasked with finding out how far the company can rip off consumers and get away with it. It is part of the new profit centered business model.

Re:Non story here.

[Rich0]

Yeah, good luck when they charge your credit card and/or ruin your credit history. I guess you can try to sue them, but have fun with that.

In principle I agree with everything you said. In practice it is you vs the megacorp - enjoy the ride.

Re:Non story here.

[Intrepid imaginaut]

Ha, in these parts (Ireland) one clause of the contract used to be that they could change the contract whenever they liked without your agreement, so increase prices and add charges as it suited them. Yes, really, I took Vodafone to task over it with ComReg. I'm not sure if it's changed now though, crazy situation. They'll try anything if you let them.

Re:Non story here.

[sesshomaru]

If you signed a contract, isn't suing replaced by "binding arbitration?"

Re:Non story here.

[Midnight Thunder]

If you have issues with these policies and the law allows them to get away with it, then I would talk to your local representative and also ensure a mass petition to get law adjusted. If 'customers' spend too much time complaining idly in corners and not massing together to push for change, then corporations clearly have the advantage.

Re:Non story here.

[91degrees]

Americans are so fricken paranoid about their credit history. Unless that's the only item on your credit history, you're not going to be refused a loan bases on that alone.

And why is suing such a terrible thing? It's a small claim. Pretty simple and they'll settle out of court because it's not worth it not to.

Re:Non story here.

[Jmc23]

Aren't there laws in the US about the minimum amount that can affect your credit rating? Isn't it extremely simple to dispute a charge on a card? Credit ratings are for gauging your ability to pay over time, how do you think a one time non-payment with no future service would affect that? Or perhaps you think he was on a contract?

Perhaps you just don't allow little details, like RTFA, get in the way of your rants?

Re:Non story here.

[big_e_1977]

Did you know that in many states your insurance rates are based on your credit score? You might feel like you are sticking it to the man by not paying that 200 dollars, but you are going to incur more than 200 dollars worth of losses due to higher rates on everything from insurance, credit cards, to new loans over the 7 years it will take for that item to roll off your credit report.

Re:Non story here.

[shentino]

Or even if you don't let them.

This isn't a case of "bend over and take it", this is outright rape.

Re:Non story here.

[Rich0]

You can ALWAYS sue. You were never going to win anyway, so the binding arbitration clause just is one more barrier to hop.

Remember - in the US anybody can sue anybody for anything. Whether they can win is another matter, but depending on your goals winning may not be necessary. If you're a small fry going after a telephone company winning probably does matter. However, if you're a big corporation who wants to punish a small fry then it does not - simply filing a suit forces the small fry to go bankrupt with legal bills.

Re:Non story here.

[Rich0]

Yup. ANYBODY can look at your credit history. If you're a big megacorp do you really want to do business with somebody whose credit history amounts to "does not ask how high when big megacorps tell them to jump?"

Re:Non story here.

[Rich0]

I think the bigger concern is with contracts.

However, all the phone company has to do is basically say that you don't roll over when asked to, and that will scare off a lot of big companies (or raise the costs you pay to work with them). Big companies want you to roll over when asked to.

Re:Non story here.

[Jmc23]

You know, besides all the shiny stuff, living in the US sounds like shit. All i hear about is how little freedom USians have.

Re:Non story here.

[Rich0]

It isn't that bad as long as you have a job. The fact that life is horrible if you don't helps make things cheaper for those who have them.

But yes, it does seem like we really enjoy re-inventing the wheel poorly. We have great productivity though (gotta run - the boss needs 12 hours of work done this afternoon).

Mind boggling

[AbRASiON]

I've heard stories as described in the subject previously from Americans and it's /fully completely mind boggingly insane/
I can't even contemplate how it's legal in any possible way. I know you guys get shafted on terrible policies / regulations and I guess 'social norms' of how things are meant to be with cell phone usage but err yeah this takes the cake.

In Australia what's described in the subject, simply wouldn't occur, at all.
I have a BlackBerry Bold 9000 as my spare phone and use it purely as a voice only 2g phone, no data at all. My provider has no issue with this at all. If I put that same SIM inside an iphone or my Galaxy S3 - I simply end up with no data, my tough luck - if I want it, I need to call them and add a data plan to my account.

You can also get phones unlocked here, you can buy phones outright and you get different priced plans - so purchasing an outright high end smartphone can be paired with a fairly minimal data and voice plan if you just use it for casual browsing / twitter / facebook and you're near wifi all the time.

I realise getting angry isn't really a solution for you guys - but based on the article? I would be angry, extremely goddamned angry. It simply shouldn't be legal.

Re:Mind boggling

[realityimpaired]

It's in the service agreement, I think... smartphone = required data plan. Don't like it, don't buy a smartphone. If you want an idevice, then get an iPod. There are carriers in the US who don't act like this, or at least who won't charge that much for adding data, and it's his own damned fault for using ATT when he already had an unlocked phone he could use elsewhere. (and if it's about coverage on the ATT network, use one of the many MVNO's who use their network).

Here in Canada that wouldn't happen either... carriers will quite happily let you have a smartphone on a non-data plan, because if your device leaks and accidentally uses data they can charge you at $50/GB. ($0.05/MB is not uncommon for per-use data, and some carriers charge $1/MB for per-use data for the first few MB). But a few years ago, the big 3 did act exactly as described in TFS, before they realized that they could extract more money by not forcing you onto a data plan. (I think it says something that even though I work for one of the big 3 and get an employee discount, it's still cheaper for me to have a plan on a fight brand for one of the competitors).

Re:Mind boggling

[InterBigs]

Yes, the US cellphone market is mind-boggling to me as a European as well. Land of the free, my ass!

Re:Mind boggling

[lexman098]

It's not actually as bad as the post claims. T-mobile doesn't do this, and even with AT&T you can get a non-AT&T branded smartphone and use it on their network without a problem.

Re:Mind boggling

[Midnight Thunder]

Laws are probably also different in Canada, so forcing on customers something they didn't agree to may not be an option. In Canada you can be 'grand-fathered' into a plan and the only things they seem to be able to do is trying to up-sell you and increasing the price of your current plan.

Re:Mind boggling

[choko]

Perhaps you should actually research US plans before you criticize. I use T-Mobile, and purchased an unlocked Note 2. They sent me a sim card for free. I pay them 50 a month for unlimited talk and text, with NO data plan (I use wifi). I could have gotten the phone on contract and paid less, or I could make make my existing plan cheaper by getting limited minutes or text. I could go prepay. I could choose a whole other company if I want. The only real difference between the US and European markets is that in the US, you can choose to let a cell phone company screw you over in exchange for a lower up front hardware price. Sounds pretty free to me.

Re:Mind boggling

[TheP4st]

because if your device leaks and accidentally uses data they can charge you at $50/GB.

Huh? How can my device "leak" so that it get access to a service that my provider doesn't include in my plan? Surely it have to be the provider that is at fault if I accidentally were given access to data services, I cannot fathom how the customer can be held as responsible.

Re:Mind boggling

[Rockoon]

The title and summary don't tell the whole story.

This guy signed a contract and some of the terms of that contract allow the company to do these sorts of things (if not, then he clearly and trivially wins in any small claims court.) Is the act of doing these things the 'wrong' part, or is the 'wrong' part that this guy signed a contract that put him in such a bind?

I know better than to sign unfavorable contracts, and in fact a contract has to be obviously very favorable before I would decide to sign one without a lawyer representing me because contracts are serious business that shouldn't be signed so lightly. I don't know when exactly it was that people en-mass decided to sign contracts so willy-nilly, but it happened at some point and I can only conclude that many people are just stupidly chasing their dancing-bunny pocket toys without regard for any common sense that older generations seem to have.

Seriously people.. contracts are serious business. Don't cry when you find out that the contract you signed is ugly.. it was ugly before you signed it.

Re:Mind boggling

[Lumpy]

In the USA the government and laws are NOT for the people, but for the corporations. A lot of people from outside the USA, and the undereducated inside the USA dont understand this. You come from a country that curbs abuse of power in corporations, so this is why you dont understand how it works. In the USA, Corporations are encouraged to abuse their powers UNLESS it infringes on another Corporation's rights.

The people have zero say in anything here.

Re:Mind boggling

[Lumpy]

My son-in-law goes over his data monthly and his cellphone bill from last month is.... $125.00US or... 79.52UKP Here in the USA we are raped without lube daily from the cellphone companies.

Re:Mind boggling

[Intrepid imaginaut]

Do you pay for texts or calls you receive? Because nobody in Europe does.

Re:Mind boggling

[Cederic]

Sorry, your example is meant to demonstrate what exactly? Please, let me criticise:

You're paying twice as much as me. I have unlmited talk and text. I have unlimited data.

So compared to you, my phone service provider is giving me a 50% discount so that I'll accept their unlimited data offer.

The only real difference between the US and European markets appears to be that the Europeans research before criticising others.

Re:Mind boggling

[hjf]

It's a one-size-fits-all contract. And all carriers have more or less the same terms.

You cannot negotiate the contract. If you don't like it, you're stuck with an old phone

another victory for 'MURICA FREEDOM.

Re:Mind boggling

[Jmc23]

Sounds like the customers are the ones refusing to use lube.

If you know you're going to get shafted, don't go over, if you do, don't bitch and whine about it, take it like a man because you knew it was going to happen!

Re:Mind boggling

[Jmc23]

Apparently you don't know better when it comes to opening your mouth before RTFA.

Re:Mind boggling

[Jmc23]

The people have zero say in anything here.

Learned helplessness is a big thing there eh?

Re:Mind boggling

[Outtascope]

... even with AT&T you can get a non-AT&T branded smartphone and use it on their network without a problem.

Not true. They won't detect it initially, but eventually they will. And when they do, blammo, there is your data plan. I'm actually surprised that this guy didn't get hit with one of their more expensive plans.

Re:Mind boggling

[advocate_one]

It's in the service agreement, I think... smartphone = required data plan.

What fscking service agreement??? He didn't make one... they should not be able to do this to him... they can fsck off as far as I'm concerned... if they did this to me, I'd fscking dump that sim card as fast as I can... In the UK, we have decent pay as you go plans... and they can't change things on you either...

Re:Mind boggling

[lexman098]

I've been doing it with multiple smartphones for years. Sorry to burst your bubble, but they get info on the phone by IMEI. If it isn't in their system (branded) they either don't have info on it or don't care.

Re:Mind boggling

[Lumpy]

Actually yes. We teach our children to be victims.

Re:Mind boggling

[toddestan]

So what do you do when everyone basically has the same terms in their contracts, and the contracts are non-negotiable so your only choices are to take it or leave it?

Re:Mind boggling

[Jesus_666]

50 bucks for talk and text is really expensive from a German point of view. With my carrier I could have that for 20 EUR/month (~27 USD/month). Add 1 GB of data* and you end up with 30 EUR/month (~40 USD/month). I also have the option of going with a (more expensive and limited) plan that gives me a smartphone at a reduced price, with something between 50-100% of the up-front price folded into the plan. Free SIM cards are usual, too.

If you don't go for a flatrate, my carrier's normal non-flat contract will never** charge more than 39 EUR/month (~52 USD/month); if that limit is reached further calls, text messages and data services are free but data is throttled. For light use that's vastly cheaper than your plan and for heavy use it's still the same price.

And that's just what my carrier offers (except for the plan with the smartphone; those are only offered by the big-name carriers). I'm certain I could find a better data flat if I actually looked for it. Availability is not an issue; you can generally assume that every area is being serviced by every carrier even if only with GPRS. Plus, no carrier over here charges you for incoming calls or text messages, which I hear is somewhat common in the States.

The United States are good at a lot of things but cheap telecommunication is unfortunately not really one of them.


* Once the data cap is reached I don't pay anything extra, they just throttle the speed to GPRS level for the rest of the month. If I want faster data after that I can order a "temporary flatrate", which jut means that my data cap is increased by the specified amount for thirty days.
** Of course they exclude a few things like international calls, roaming, premium phone services and me ordering a temporary flatrate. Regular calls, text messages and data services are explicitly covered, though, which should cover the needs of most "normal" people.

Re:Mind boggling

[DarwinSurvivor]

That's why I didn't set up automatic billing. With my current monthly-prepaid (via credit card each month on their website), I only have about $0.75 of balance on my phone, so if I were to even TRY to make a long distance call or something, it would simply not work because I don't have enough balance on my account to pay for it.

Re:Mind boggling

[DarwinSurvivor]

HA, I live in Canada and get unlimited talk/text/data (text is national, talk is local) for $29/month. Mind you I'm on Wind and the other carriers around here charge $80/month for unlimited evenings/weekends and 5GB/month, so YMMV. The only real disadvantage for Wind right now is coverage, but their area increases every month at a fairly decent rate.

Re:Mind boggling

[shutdown -p now]

One thing worth remembering is that for GP, T-Mo is offering him voice and text for that same price on the entire territory of US. Your European cellular provider, on the other hand, would only provide it for that price within your country - if you were to travel to the country next door, they'll charge you insane prices for roaming. And a typical European country is about the size of one US state.

Re:Mind boggling

[Rockoon]

You cannot negotiate the contract. If you don't like it, you're stuck with an old phone

....by 'stuck with an old phone' do you mean 'having not signed an unfavorable contract' ???

Your argument seems to revolve around the idea that you have some sort of 'right' to a smart phone, and that this leads to the idea that because nobody (that you can find) wants to sell you one at a price that makes you both happy that its 'not fair' and further, that you shouldn't be responsible for choosing to make a purchase that you inevitably werent going to be happy with.

Bullshit. You don't have to partake. Nobody is making you sign a shitty contract. Its called a choice when you voluntarily sign a contract.

Re:Mind boggling

[Rockoon]

Leave it. Duh.

Do I want a smart phone? Sure. Do I need one? No. If I get one do I have to sign a contract? No. Therefore its a choice to sign a contract, its even a choice whether or not to buy a smart phone. This isnt a necessity of life we are talking about here. We are talking about choices and being man enough to accept the responsibilities involved in making them.

If something costs more than you think its worth, then don't buy it. Duh.

Re:Mind boggling

[hjf]

You just don't get it, do you? You don't get to tell me what fucking phone I can use.

Re:Mind boggling

[Neil Boekend]

I don't know if it would be legal here in the Netherlands, I guess it wouldn't, but it wouldn't last long anyway. They changed the terms of the contract, so there is no way of forcing you to keep it. You can drop them like a brick into a black hole. Even if you are still paying for a phone.

Re:Mind boggling

[SoulNibbler]

Of course the European contract-less plans sometimes get even better. Here in Austria I pay €10/month for 500min +500txt +5GB. Voice and txt coverage is good data is good everywhere I have to wait (trains and platforms), roaming can be a bitch but since its a Chinese smartphone it has two sim cards so picking up another shortterm number when traveling is rather trivial.

Re:Mind boggling

[Shred303]

Keep in mind AT&T (the child of ma Bell) was given a government monopoly, ergo it's network and stranglehold that was created by the government and very much exists today.

Re:Mind boggling

[uninformedLuddite]

Give them a pair of scissors and they will be fine. tell them not to run with them.

I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[acidfast7]

... from the Apple Store when I was in US (549 USD). I wanted to use it for a month while I was there and I was shocked that you guys STILL don't have reasonable prepaid-SIM options. I consider reasonable to be filling in an online form, having it mailed to an address with credit already on it, getting on SMS when it's low on credit and recharging online or at a kiosk with a scratch card&SMS solution.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[blahbooboo]

There are several ways you just didn't know where or how to get them. To name a few options, T mobile sells prepaid sims in their stores and online, eBay has prepaid pre carded t mobile sims, straight talk sells pre paid sims.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[acidfast7]

T-mobile is horrible because the minutes expire after a year and it costs roughly 20 cents/min. Straight talk is a monthly plan for at least 30USD/mo.

Both options are terrible, at best.

Here (Germany), I can walk into a store, show ID, get a prepaid SIM put it into the phone, buy a recharge card for as little as €5, scratch the foil, send as SMS and have €5 immediately (at .05€/min or .€.05/MB).

Another way to think about it is that, I can walk into almost any third-party store and for €30 walk out in 15 mins with a new functioning Nokia candy-bar phone with credit. Can't really get that in the US?

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[jbolden]

You can get pure minute plans in the United States. Page Plus which is essentially Verizon has them. There is no physical SIM because the network is CDMA but close enough. There are some networks like that on GSM. As for the minutes expiring, I've had that happen in Europe as well.

As far as prices their are geographic concentration issues which make it much more expensive to provide service in the United States than Europe.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[vlm]

Your german experience is basically the USA "virgin mobile" experience, although there's a bunch of microscopically more expensive competitors. A couple years back I paid $20 for my new dumbphone and then used, on a long term average, around $8/month of minutes. Which was something like 80 minutes per month, which is a lot of talking. I believe the prices have risen somewhat to something like 25 cents per minute, but the phones are still about the cost of a restaurant lunch.

I got into the republic wireless beta over a year ago, its open to the public now I believe. I think I paid $200 for my phone and its been $20/month since then. So far no problems at all. That's why my dumbphone non-contract price data might be a little obsolete.

It is, however, impossible to get a phone heavily advertised on TV in the US or from a retail "cell phone store" for less than $100/mo or whatever. Those TV commercials and $2000/month storefront rentals cost a lot of money. In the old days people used to describe USA as the place where 1/2 the TV commercials were car commercials, but in the future we'll probably describe USA TV commercials as 1/3 or so cell phone ads. Endless self promotion costs a lot of money, mostly paid for at a rate of $120/month.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[fustakrakich]

Too bad people have to show ID to get a damn SIM. Bunch of goddamn saps, letting the government run all over 'em like that.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[Secret Agent Man]

I have a prepaid cell phone using T-Mobile. While it's true that the minutes expire after a year, if you put any amount of additional minutes on it (i.e. even $5 worth, for example), the timer is reset for all of your existing minutes. Additionally, after putting a certain amount of money into it over time (I forget the precise amount - been a few years), the cost is about 10 cents a minute. It's probably not the best deal, but considering I only have to put ~$50/year into my phone for talk and text (and the phone itself was only $30 off the shelf), I consider it a bargain.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[xaxa]

Too bad people have to show ID to get a damn SIM. Bunch of goddamn saps, letting the government run all over 'em like that.

I wonder when they introduced that rule? I bought a SIM in Germany, from a budget supermarket, in about 2009. It asked for an address when I activated it, and wouldn't take my British address, so I just gave the address of the hotel.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[acidfast7]

That's if I pay cash. I always have the option of paying directly from a bank account without showing ID. also, I'm sure that i could slip the guy an extra €50 or €100 and get him to make a mistake during "data entry."

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[JonahsDad]

T-mobile is horrible because the minutes expire after a year and it costs roughly 20 cents/min.

This is mostly incorrect. I am currently on my second smartphone on a T-mobile pay-as-you-go plan. I buy minutes $100 at a time, making them $0.10 a minute. Text messages also $0.10 (picture messages $0.25). Once you've spent $100, minutes expire after 1 year. However, if you buy more minutes, that restarts the 1 year timeline on all of your minutes. Right now, my pay-as-you-go plan costs me about $10 a month.

The reason T-mobile might be a terrible option: Coverage. I don't have a problem, but some of my coworkers live in more rural areas and have tried T-mobile and not been happy.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[acidfast7]

Aldi-Talk, eh? An address is the same as an "ID" as everyone is listed in a central database.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[Teckla]

I have a prepaid cell phone using T-Mobile. While it's true that the minutes expire after a year, if you put any amount of additional minutes on it (i.e. even $5 worth, for example), the timer is reset for all of your existing minutes. Additionally, after putting a certain amount of money into it over time (I forget the precise amount - been a few years), the cost is about 10 cents a minute. It's probably not the best deal, but considering I only have to put ~$50/year into my phone for talk and text (and the phone itself was only $30 off the shelf), I consider it a bargain.

I do the same. PAYG T-Mobile - 10 cents/minute - top off the minutes once in a great while - end up paying less than $6/month for my cell phone service. And my phone was only $20 off the shelf.

If and when I'm ready to upgrade to data and a smartphone, T-Mobile has earned my business for treating me so well. I also highly recommend them to anyone and everyone. I think AT&T and Verizon are abusively expensive and unfair to customers.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[xaxa]

Aldi-Talk, eh? An address is the same as an "ID" as everyone is listed in a central database.

Except no-one verified the address, so nothing would have prevented me from putting in a completely false address.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[acidfast7]

If you were at ALDI/LIDL/Netto/Penny they should've taken your address before selling the card unless it came by mail. But most of the time, people don't care, especially if it's obvious that you're not German. Another possibility is that the address of the hotel was noted (as it should be in the database) and any name was accepted. It's an interesting system.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[DigitalSorceress]

Here in the US, only a criminal mastermind or a therrust would possibly want/need a SIM without having to submit to a credit check/proof of identity. /sarcasm

Seriously, it's just a completely different mindset here than say, Europe. The previous statement is true for many things - sometimes the US is the batshite crazy place, and sometimes, its the EU.

In the case of stupid laws written by/for major corporations, we've got a pretty tight lock on the crazy.

~sigh~

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[Lawrence_Bird]

Tmob in USA prepaid 1000 mins= $100 + sales tax (if any). texts are 10c each way

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[Lawrence_Bird]

I split time between a large metro area and a pretty rural area. The rural area I get dumped onto ATT(an original Cingular net) and coverage is mostly ok. Rural areas you really have to look into not just the coverage map of your contract provider but also who they have roaming agreements with.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[stenvar]

Another way to think about it is that, I can walk into almost any third-party store and for €30 walk out in 15 mins with a new functioning Nokia candy-bar phone with credit. Can't really get that in the US?

Yes, there are many companies that sell phones plus credit prepackaged at supermarkets and drugstores. They start at around $15 for phone plus minutes. I usually buy one for overseas visitors and throw it away when they leave. You can fill up with prepaid cards too. A step up from that are the prepaid options from the carriers.

The US does lack SIM card portability, which sucks. But if you just want cheap phone or smartphone service, you can certainly get it at prices comparable to, or cheaper than, Germany.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[burningcpu]

You missed the without-contract monthly 4G plans from t mobile. The rates are much more reasonable, but you have to pay a month at a time.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[Jmc23]

Never been to Walmart eh?

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[hjf]

Here (Argentina) I can get a sim, like, anywhere. All small drugstores carry them and they cost less than USD 2. I just need to have money (no ID required). They are usually pre-activated and the phone number is in a label on it.

I can either do a "virtual recharge" (where you pay there and they instantly recharge whatever amount you want), or get a scratchable card.

The prices suck, though. I think it's about USD 0,30/min for calls and 0,10 per sms. Internet is not that bad, it's USD 0,20 a day "unlimited (limited to 10MB unlimited, then limited to 64kbps after that, but for 0,20 again you can "unlimit" it again - you know how the fine prints work, with their own definition of unlimited). Unlimited internet is artificially limited to 5Mbit for the "white" sims, and it's faster for "red" sim cards (not prepaid) and unlimited for the "black" sim cards (data only).

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[Macrat]

T-mobile is horrible because the minutes expire after a year ...

Incorrect.

The prepay account expires a year after you add money to the account.

If you add $10 to the account before the end of the year period, it continues on.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[richlv]

i have to say that the german "show id" policy is crap as well.
try getting free wifi in germany without giving up your personal information.
gema has germany by the balls so bad it gotta hurt.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[miroku000]

>

Another way to think about it is that, I can walk into almost any third-party store and for €30 walk out in 15 mins with a new functioning Nokia candy-bar phone with credit. Can't really get that in the US?

You can walk into almost any walmart or many mini-marts and do this.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[Algan]

You can go into an AT&T store, pay $25 and walk out with a paygo sim card with $25 credit. You can then choose the $2/day unlimited voice/text or $0.10 per minute/text plans. It's more expensive, but doable.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[sir-gold]

I wonder when they introduced that rule?

When homeland security started freaking out about terrorists using untraceable burner phones as remote-controlled explosive detonators

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[uninformedLuddite]

He probably asked in several stores and was told only whatever was the most profitable avenue for the store employee. I too have spent time in the US and was staggered by how rude, unhelpful and outright deceitful your customer service people can be.

Re:I picked up an unlocked iPhone4s last month...

[guevera]

You have to show your ID to buy a sim card? That's some weak sauce. I mean, that's why we call 'em burners, ya know.

Obligatory.

[Anonymous Coward]

" I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further. " - AT&T

Old news: Verizon

[stevegee58]

Verizon was pulling the same trick years ago. They were even trying to include LG env3 phones in the data phone category which is a joke of course.
The current crop of non-data phones available from the carriers is a joke. Want a full qwerty keyboard for texting? Forget it, that's only on a data phone.
It's basically a plot to get everyone on board with the more expensive data plans.

Re:Old news: Verizon

[Dasuraga]

> a plot I think it's more due to market research than anything. Most people want data.

Re:Old news: Verizon

[stevegee58]

That's fine, but why put handcuffs on those who don't want it?

Re:Old news: Verizon

[wvmarle]

While it may be true that most people want data, that is no reason for a carrier to just add it to your contract without asking.

A carrier sells mobile service. The customer decides which services they want to buy: voice, data, SMS, or other services. The customer decides which model phone they use to tap into those services. End of story.

Re:Old news: Verizon

[Dasuraga]

I agree that opting people in so abruptly is a bit much, but if the "default" for them is a data-inclusive plan that 99% of people take, and its an actual logistical effort for them, then there's nothing inherently evil about not offering an opt-out. I can't ask for my phone to not receive SMS (maybe I can?)

I doubt that it's the case here though.

Re:Old news: Verizon

[stevegee58]

I doubt it's 99%. I'm somewhat strange but I can't believe I'm that strange to not want a data plan.

Re:Old news: Verizon

[Dasuraga]

Considering the current state of affairs I agree with you completely.

When I got my ADSL package, I was "forced" into getting TV and a home phone number as well. Granted, the price was reasonable (as in it was a price I was willing to pay for my internet), but I couldn't opt out of the other two services. This is probably what we're going towards.

Re: Old news: Verizon

[sys_mast]

Sure can stop SMS. I know those that have no SMS plan, plus SMS is blocked so won't get per use charges when someone TXTs inbound. (Another AT&T augh, they charge for incoming TXt). Of course have to have a data plan :/

Re:Old news: Verizon

[cellocgw]

I can't ask for my phone to not receive SMS (maybe I can?)

Yes, with Verizon you can have SMS turned off. I believe this has to be done via phone call to cust svc (not available via your web-page account management), but I went for many years with SMS blocked on my phone.

Re:Old news: Verizon

[bingoUV]

Hope your internet service provider does some market research ; find most people don't post on slashdot and disable your slashdot posting.

Re:Old news: Verizon

[Dasuraga]

My point was mainly that I doubt it was some malaligned plot.

If I ran a burger shop I would assume everyone wants cheese on their hamburgers. and make everyone pay for it. I probably wouldn't last very long but it wouldn't be because of some evil intentions, more that it makes less work for me.

Re:Old news: Verizon

[bingoUV]

Here, it took MORE work for AT&T to detect phone devices, and interpret they are capable of data, and then charge for it. So less work analogy is completely incorrect.

An iPhone just to make calls?

[steelfood]

Yeah, I believe that one. That's about the last thing anybody does with an iPhone anymore. I'm always a bit surprised it still has the ability to make calls each time Apple announces a new version.

Re:An iPhone just to make calls?

[Simply Curious]

I have wifi available everywhere except in transit. I have no need of a data plan whatsoever. It would be nice, however, to have my phone be more user-friendly, able to notify me of mail, and have a few games on it for passing the time.

Of course I would be doing more with it than just making calls. However, I would not be doing more on the network than making calls. The requirement of a data plan prevents that.

Re:An iPhone just to make calls?

[erroneus]

I used to carry around a palm pilot and later a Sony Clie'. It couldn't make phone calls. Unbelievable right?

What is wrong with using your phone for the same purpose but not needing email or browsing while not at home or at the office or depending only on WiFi? Just because it's mobile doesn't mean we need to suckle from the teat of carrier provided data plans. I do fine without it. That style of usage is precisely my plan.

But I get what you're saying. Is it a phone (primarily) or is it a computer? And are the phone functions as good as they could be or should be?

Re:An iPhone just to make calls?

[leathered]

The iPhone has always been a pocket computer with phone capabilities added almost as an afterthought. The same could be said of many Androids.

I've been using one for the last couple of weeks (was given to me); an iPhone 4 with a no-data SIM. The call quality is pretty poor compared to the BB I was using previously and the battery life is wanting too, although not quite as bad as thought it would be, used moderately I get 2 days between charges with Wi-Fi, bluetooth, mobile data etc all turned off.

Call quality has always seemed poor to me when I receive calls from iPhones, always sounds muffled and prone to dropouts. For me old Motorolas were always the best, closely followed by Nokias.

Re:An iPhone just to make calls?

[Purity Of Essence]

I own a 3GS and use AT&T for my other phone. I wanted to switch over to my 3GS because this "feature phone" I have is an absolute piece of shit. I was told I'd have to buy the data plan. I have WiFi, I don't need or want to spend another $30 a month for a terrible service I'll never use.

Re:An iPhone just to make calls?

[Pascal Sartoretti]

Yeah, I believe that one. That's about the last thing anybody does with an iPhone anymore.

My kids use my old iPhones. They have pre-paid minutes, and no data plan. And Wifi in many places.

I'm always a bit surprised it still has the ability to make calls each time Apple announces a new version.

And you might even be more surprised that an iPhone 3GS, released in 2009, is still supported by the latest iOS version. Please show me any smartphone vendor whose products still get software upgrades after more than a few months...

Re:An iPhone just to make calls?

[Pascal Sartoretti]

(hate to reply to ACs, but....) My wife and my father both have a 3GS running iOS 6, with no known problem. Not jailbroken, however, but some people just needed a reliable phone. Which the 3GS is.

Re:An iPhone just to make calls?

[MacDork]

And you might even be more surprised that an iPhone 3GS, released in 2009, is still supported by the latest iOS version.

Because the latest version of iOS does approximately what Android did 3 years ago. So you wanna add an attachment to your email. Sure, old hardware can do that. Congratulations. Now iOS can too :D

Re:An iPhone just to make calls?

[RatherBeAnonymous]

Google does OK by the Nexus line, but not as well as Apple with the iPhone. The Nexus one released in January of 2010 and its last patch came in Sept of 2011. The Nexus S launched in Dec 2010 and can run Android Jelly Bean 4.1.2, but Google announced last Nov. that it will not be updated to 4.2. The Galaxy Nexus was released in Nov of 2011 and can run Jelly Bean 4.2.1. When asked about Android phones I only recommend the Nexus line product.

Re:An iPhone just to make calls?

[Waccoon]

I still find it puzzling that people consider four years of support for any software product amazing, especially when you still have to pay for updates.

Re:An iPhone just to make calls?

[sir-gold]

I just want to say that the whole "pocket computer with phone add-ons" idea really blew me away with my first android phone (a tmobile g2). It was a special moment for me, realizing that the thing I was holding in my hand had more power, more internet connectivity, and more battery life than my 2 year-old netbook (even had the same screen resolution I think), and also made my first computer (a 386) look like a stone tool in comparison.

As a phone however, it kinda sucks. the screen gets greasy, and half the time the ringer mutes itself in my pocket and I miss calls

Yep theyre assholes

[Anonymous Coward]

which as I see it should get this modded up as insightful

Crap like this makes me want to write an app that purposefully wastes all the "left over" bandwidth I have on my contract at the end of the month. If we all did it, we'd break this farce of a "contract" they have with us.

Like every other sales organization since the beginning of time they over commit and under deliver, And they rely on their size and their bullying tactics and fleet of lawyers to maintain their position.

signed

A loyal AT&T customer

The Smartphone Bubble

[Compaqt]

Sure, the carrier's are the spawn of the devil.

But all this (having to get your phones from a carrier instead of buying a phone outright and then buying service) isn't just their fault. It's also the fault of users, who like the ability to get a "free" phone, which is really being payed for by their monthly payments.

But, beyond that, it's the fault of the government (the Fed, specifically), for lending out free money, basically. 0 or (in a sense, even negative) interest rates. Think about what percent you get for your savings account. The price signals being given out are simply to consume, consume, consume.

The same loose money policy which was responsible for the housing bubble is also responsible for the smartphone bubble (though it's possible that's about to burst).

Re:The Smartphone Bubble

[erroneus]

Unlocked phones are becoming more available than they were before. I fell for the discount gag a few too many times myself. No longer.

Re:The Smartphone Bubble

[cheekyjohnson]

The companies bear no responsibility

He didn't say that. He placed blame on companies, consumers, and the government.

Re:The Smartphone Bubble

[drjzzz]

partly true -- the bits about subsidized phones -- and mostly silly -- the bulk comparing the housing bubble to an oversupply of smartphones and criticizing a stimulatory fiscal policy during a deep recession. And all off topic (raging against AT&T, c'mon now)

Re:The Smartphone Bubble

[big_e_1977]

No, he only blamed the government, the Fed specifically.

Re:The Smartphone Bubble

[Waccoon]

Many social programs and forms of regulation exist because the public is too lazy to stick up for their own rights. It's a long, slow downward spiral until we reach a breaking point.

Perhaps that breaking point will be if corporations write EULAs that exclude hardware warranties. Hey, if a product dies, that hurts our reputation, and then people won't buy our product. See? The industry can regulate itself, so warranties aren't necessary.

Re:The Smartphone Bubble

[cheekyjohnson]

But all this (having to get your phones from a carrier instead of buying a phone outright and then buying service) isn't just their fault. It's also the fault of users

But, beyond that, it's the fault of the government

That makes me think all three were blamed.

Consumer Cellular

[msk]

Since you have a phone that can use AT&T data (even though you don't want), switch to Consumer Cellular, which uses the AT&T network but doesn't force you into a data plan.

Re:Consumer Cellular

[Slicker]

I've considered T-Mobile but my work really requires that I have good cellular connectivity... The very limited areas of service would substantially hurt me. What I really need is verizon's network but AT&T or Sprint will due. I will look into "Consumer Cellular" but you never know.. Others I've looked at all had some difficult to deal with catch to them. I understand no service is likely to ever be ideal...

Re:Consumer Cellular

[msk]

I've been considering taking a phone that does only UMTS bands I & IV (ostensibly T-Mobile, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UMTS_frequency_bands) to Consumer Cellular, but they won't say with certainty if any date rate faster than EDGE will work.

Do you or anyone on the thread have experience with this combination?

Re:Consumer Cellular

[dfeifer]

Heh. If your work requires it then they should be paying for it. Unless of course you are self employed.

Re:Consumer Cellular

[fikx]

So, sounds like AT&T needs to stop dealing directly with customers. Companies like Consumer Cellular, Straight Talk, etc. can get better service from AT&T than consumers...maybe AT&T needs to be just supplier to companies, not end users. Any chance they would be happy as a back-bone supplier in cellular? Or would they still try to eat their customers lunch later down the line by trying to bypass 'em? I seem to remember AT&T going through phases like that in the past...

The market defines its behaviors.

[hessian]

The problem with the cell phone carrier market is that there are relatively few providers, and worse, consumers do not demonstrate loyalty to any one, but switch when better deals are offered on the others.

This means the only factor that matters is price and availability of features the market wants.

As a result, this news story will have zero effect. Every few months another atrocity comes out about some cellular carrier or another, but the audience just doesn't care.

Re:The market defines its behaviors.

[Njovich]

Where I live the government decides or limits a lot of the behaviors for carriers... but I guess that is too much communism for the US?

Re:The market defines its behaviors.

[Anonymous Coward]

One man, one vote. The Man is Benjamin Franklin and each franklin is a vote.

Re:The market defines its behaviors.

[Anonymous Coward]

Lack of loyalty is a GOOD thing. In the EU, they made things even easier for people to change, when they said you could keep your number if you switch from one company to another. When that happened, prices dropped a lot, and the quality of their offers went up.

What the US lacks, is true competition, and for that, the government is to blame more than the corpses themselves.

Re:The market defines its behaviors.

[Khashishi]

Do providers act like dicks because consumers don't demonstrate loyalty to any of them, or do consumers not demonstrate loyalty because the providers are all a bunch of dicks?

Re:The market defines its behaviors.

[Keith Henson]

I won't deal with AT&T for what they did to Len Rose years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Rose_(hacker)

Choice

[Anonymous Coward]

T Mobile just informed me that they were increasing my 4G data cap from 100MB to 500MB at no charge (I pay $50/month, no contract). Point is, even if all the companies are asshats, there are better deals out there. Vote with your money and flee AT&T.

Re:Choice

[flimflammer]

I recently got a smartphone without a data plan from T-mobile replacing my old razr2 (am in a contract with them so it was a free upgrade), and all T-Mobile did was tell me on their site that if I want to use data at a reasonable price, I needed a data plan. The first thing I did was disable data capabilities on my phone outside of direct Wifi. I made a mistake, because there was a special setting you need to flip to disable all data completely, so I ended up with an extra $15 in charges the first month, which T-Mobile was happy to remove after I explained the situation and my intent not to use data. Now my phone is essentially a dumbphone unless I'm home or at a coffee shop or something. Perfect for my uses.

Over a year ago, I complained to the FCC

[Slicker]

My contact was over and I wanted a smartphone but not a data plan. Sprint, AT&T, and Verizon all said that if I used any kind of smartphone, I must have a data plan. My brother bought a Nexus One outright and his carrier discovered this and added a $30 charge per month for data against his will. My plan was to use WiFi only for data...

Each carrier responded by calling me and telling me that that is their policy and therefore I was not wronged. I responded that I think law trumps company policy. As far as the FCC was concerned, that was it... they had done their due diligence, I suppose..

I send an email to one law firm that specializes in class action suites but never got a response.

If a lawyer anywhere on this planet would be willing to take up this as a class action suite, I will strongly support it. I am a web developer, I can build an excellent web site to begin the process of finding the many, many other victims.

Re:Over a year ago, I complained to the FCC

[wvmarle]

How does your carrier find out which phone you use?

It sounds like they're spying on their customers. Privacy breach?

Re:Over a year ago, I complained to the FCC

[Anonymous Coward]

It's actually very easy. Every phone comes with what's called IMEISV which is a code that relates to phone model and software version.

Re:Over a year ago, I complained to the FCC

[realityimpaired]

Your phone's IMEI identifies the make/model of the phone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMEI

You can't use a cellular network without transmitting your IMEI to the network. It's one half of the authentication circle required to actually make a cellular phone call.

Re:Over a year ago, I complained to the FCC

[the eric conspiracy]

IMEI. Gets broadcast every time you make a call.

Re:Over a year ago, I complained to the FCC

[the eric conspiracy]

You called the three carriers who have this policy. Next time call some more, say including T-Mobile that don't have this policy.

Re:Over a year ago, I complained to the FCC

[transporter_ii]

Where I work uses AT&T, but refused to get us smartphones. I purchased an AT&T LG Thrive prepaid smartphone and stuck my work sim card into it. No dataplan, I just use the wifi. They did not raise the price of the monthly.

Re:Over a year ago, I complained to the FCC

[Lawrence_Bird]

Exaclty - I have used TMO prepaid with a smartphone for about three years as I only use wi-fi for data. There is no plan for them to opt me into and they have not complained about my use of prepaid minutes for regular calling. Given the taxes and other tithes on most monthly plans, unless you are a major league talk/texter, the prepaid plans w/no data work out to your advantage.

Re:Over a year ago, I complained to the FCC

[phayes]

This is the same IMEI that the carriers refuse to use to shut down the market in stolen phones, right? Funny that US carriers use the IMEI to justify added charges but refuse to use them to stop thieves...

Re:Over a year ago, I complained to the FCC

[PPH]

They've been trying to return your call. But the connections keep getting dropped.

Re:Over a year ago, I complained to the FCC

[flimflammer]

It's not a case of affordability. It's a case of not wanting to pay for something you have no intention on using. Just because you have a phone that can technically do something doesn't mean you want to do it. Thankfully, T-Mobile understands this and doesn't do this bullshit.

Re:Over a year ago, I complained to the FCC

[mbourgon]

Not anymore. They discontinued it for new users in October(http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/19/t-mobile-drops-200mb-smartphone-data-plan/). Now, the minimum is $20. I'm buying a freedompop ($100, 500mb/month free) later today. Hopefully that'll work. Separate device, but hopefully still workable.

Re:Over a year ago, I complained to the FCC

[countach]

That article says you can program new IMEIs to the handset. Someone needs to come up with a hack.

Re:Over a year ago, I complained to the FCC

[puto]

Funny how ATT does blacklist them...

Welcome to America

[DiSKiLLeR]

That sort of shit doesn't happen anywhere else in the world.

You can use any kind of phone you want, and get whatever kind of plan you want. You aren't forced to use a dataplan just because you have a smartphone.

Re:Welcome to America

[bogaboga]

I whole heartedly agree. Trouble is, most Americans think the [mighty] USA is the best place to be.

They view themselves as being superior to others nations, after all they have the strongest, the best of everything, including democracy.

No wonder companies like At&T treat them that way.

Re:Welcome to America

[fustakrakich]

When it comes to cell phone service, Americans are pretty dumb. I mean, the dumbasses found it acceptable to pay to receive calls! They bitch, bitch, bitch, and still don't actually do anything about it. It's just like their politics. 13% approval rating and 95% reelection rate.

Re:Welcome to America

[the eric conspiracy]

It doesn't even happen in America if you bother to find the a carrier that offers the type of plan that fits your particular usage.

This is really self inflicted.

The contract terms are disclosed and there are lots of other carriers that don't have this type of terms in their contracts.

Re:Welcome to America

[VortexCortex]

I whole heartedly agree. Trouble is, most Americans think the [mighty] USA is the best place to be.

They view themselves as being superior to others nations, after all they have the strongest, the best of everything, including democracy.

So, what you're saying is that you think Americans are mostly straw-men? Got any research or polls to back up those claims? I mean, is that statement more true or less true in the US than say, say Japan, England, China, Germany, France, or North Korea?

You're uninformed. Look, just because you believe the USA propaganda, doesn't mean most of the citizens actually do.

If I think the USA is the best place to be it's because that's where most of my family and safety net is, not due to chauvinistic pride or statism.

Furthermore, I'm having trouble finding any country in the world that actually has the corporate interests in check as well as a good standard of living. Bailing out of the country isn't going to fix the problem here, and it looks to me like I'll simply find more of the same elsewhere. Horses of a different color have shit that smells the same. Where do you suggest that is so much better? I'm genuinely interested if it's any better than our amber waves of grain stuffed straw-men.

Re:Welcome to America

[deimtee]

Unless they've already heard it before or travelled to the US, most people in the rest of the world won't believe that americans pay to receive calls or text messages.
They laugh and think you're joking. Convince them you're serious and they still won't believe until they check it.

Re:Welcome to America

[tepples]

Is 3's massive GSM coverage the result of a roaming agreement that costs 3 money? If so, your excessive use of it may have violated policy.

Re:Welcome to America

[metrix007]

SIlly goose. Your economic engine caused a global recession and need government bailouts and your education system bans the teaching of evolution. Your constitution has not been solid since the patriot act, if not before.

Car analogy please!

[rvw]

I don't understand this. Can someone explain this to me using a car analogy?

Re:Car analogy please!

[zm]

They charged him highway toll because he has a car capable of doing highway speed, even though he never drives on a highway.

Re:Car analogy please!

[vlm]

You drive one of the rare cars that actually requires high octane gas (turbo'd sportcar or whatever)
Your lawnmower works fine with low octane gas.
So you drive to the gas station, fill your little one gallon lawnmower gas can with the cheaper low octane gas. See on the bill that you are being charged for high octane gas. "Its company policy that if you have a car requiring high octane gas, we will charge you for high octane gas, no matter what you actually use or want". Finally, you can't go to an alternative gas station provider because you were dumb enough to sign a 2-year gasoline contract and there's only a handful of gas stations who collude WRT prices and services anyway.

Re:Car analogy please!

[bogaboga]

"Its company policy that if you have a car requiring high octane gas, we will charge you for high octane gas, no matter what you actually use or want". Finally, you can't go to an alternative gas station provider because you were dumb enough to sign a 2-year gasoline contract and there's only a handful of gas stations who collude WRT prices and services anyway.

(emphasis mine...)

Not exactly...It's better explained this way: -

"Its company policy that if you have a car that would satisfy you with low octane gas, we will charge you for high octane gas, no matter what you actually use or want". Finally, you can't go to an alternative gas station provider because you were dumb enough to sign a 2-year gasoline contract and there's only a handful of gas stations who collude WRT prices and services anyway.

Re:Car analogy please!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello there.

We have noticed that your car your car has an OnStar system installed therefore we are enabling your OnStart service at X / month.

If you do not wish to use this OnStar service please buy a car without OnStar capabilities.

Regards

Re:Car analogy please!

[betterunixthanunix]

It's like going to the mechanic for an oil change, and being charged for a new transmission.

Re:Car analogy please!

[PPH]

Its as stupid as bitching about buying a new car and saying "I want the price of the car reduced because it has backseats and I don't want them because no one rides back there. Its not fair you include the price of seats in the back!"

No, its nothing like that. The back seats are provided by the same supplier as the car. If they choose not to offer a car without back seats, that's their business.

Its like buying a car and then receiving a bill from a local tire shop for a set of high performance tires. Which you don't want and never had installed.

But, the car dealer will tell you, "We have a contract with this tire store to provide all cars of this particular model with a new set of tires".

"But", you reply, "I'm happy with the tires that came with the car. And I didn't even buy the car from you. I bought it from my brother-in-law."

"Tough luck", they reply. "We have a deal with the tire company. And when you came in to our parts department for that air freshener, you established a business relationship with us. So pay up for the new tires or else."

This is what happened after New York forced organized crime out of the construction business. They had to go someplace.

Re:Car analogy please!

[PPH]

Only half way? Cellular customers are going to abandon AT&T and switch to your service in droves!

Re:Car analogy please!

[sir-gold]

You drive one of the rare cars that actually requires high octane gas (turbo'd sportcar or whatever)
Your lawnmower works fine with low octane gas.
So you drive to the gas station, fill your little one gallon lawnmower gas can with the cheaper low octane gas. See on the bill that you are being charged for high octane gas. "Its company policy that if you have a car requiring high octane gas, we will charge you for high octane gas, no matter what you actually use or want".

I actually had something a bit like this happen when trying to buy tires at a Mill's Fleet Farm
My car was an 1987 chrysler lebaron GTS turbo, which is the same car as the chrysler lebaron gts, and the dodge lancer (not to be confused with the mitsu lancer). For some reason, my specific car was listed, in thier book, as needing (more expensive) H rated tires. While they did have my size (stock alloy rims) in S rating, which was listed for the other 2 cars (lebaron gts and lancer), they didn't have them in H rating, and simply refused to sell me any tires.

The max rated speed of S rated tires is (I think) 113 mph, and the max speed for H rated tires is (I think) 130mph, neither speed being legally attainable anywhere in wisconsin (except at the track). They would rather lose a customer (we stopped getting tires there completely) than stray from words of the almighty tire-size bible. (another tire shop in town had no problem putting S rated tires on the car)

Re:Car analogy please!

[Lithdren]

So he buys gas then?

I'd think a better way of looking at it is he used to drive an old beater. Got sick of it, and bought a used Jeep. The used Jeep comes with a spot for a spare tire, and Jeep realized he might at some point need a spare tire, so they sent him one, then charged him full price for it. He has no intention of using a spare tire, see he's got this cell phone now and if his tire goes flat he'll call AAA. At least he would have but he ended up cancling his cell phone plan over these BS Charges AT&T was trying to charge... ...Wait a second...

small claims court

[Anonymous Coward]

This seems to be a pretty open and shut case. Take them to small claims court, or if you have enough time get a lawyer and try organizing a class action suit....

Re:small claims court

[Spiked_Three]

Seriously? Don't you know you were forced to sign an agreement to not sue them, especially in a class action suite when you were born, err I mean started using their service. You agreed to arbitration, which in short means they always win, no matter what.

Re:small claims court

[RatherBeAnonymous]

According to the standard AT&T customer agreement, (http://www.att.com/shop/en/legalterms.html?toskey=wirelessCustomerAgreement#arbAgreement) small claims court is still an option.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, either party may bring an individual action in small claims court.

Re:small claims court

[Spiked_Three]

No you don't and no they aren't. shut the fuck up AC

This is why

[erroneus]

This is the reason why I am moving to pre-paid service at the end of this month. I have been waiting for my early termination fee to drop low enough to leave. I have my Nexus 4 because it is unlocked and not branded with any carrier, easily (and already rooted) and is completely under my control. Going prepaid, I am in control of the deal. They can decide not to do business with me each month, but that's the freedom of choice I need.

And yes. No need for data plans here.

The big carriers will come around eventually, but only after large numbers have jumped ship.

Re:This is why

[vlm]

I've been prepaid / non-contract since the early 00s when I got sick of paying $80 for two dumbphones and switched to about $8/month/phone prepay. I think the business logic "big cell providers" use, is anyone dumb enough to sign a contract is dumb enough to be taken advantage of in pretty much any technically possible way. I mean how dumb do you have to be, to pay $120/month for two years for a $300 phone? Thats $3180. I'm getting the same service for a grand total of $780 over the two years (24*20+300). I'm sure I'll find some way to spend the $2400 I'll save merely by selecting an alternative billing method.

Re:This is why

[vlm]

Whoops that would be $2880 for two years because you get a "free" phone. I keep forgetting about what a great deal you're getting with that "free" phone. It only cost you $2100 more than paying for it yourself. Kind of the ultimate subprime loan.

Re:This is why

[wvmarle]

What will stop you from changing prepaid all the time is the need to keep your number. Unless no-one ever calls you or so, and it doesn't matter that your number changes all the time.

Re:This is why

[sensationull]

Yea, our government regulates this, you have to be able to keep your number between providers.

New Zealand FTW; well until the US Government of Companies tells our government that they are harming profits by preventing the exploitation of citizens.

Re:This is why

[realityimpaired]

What service do you actually *get* for $8/mo? Does that cover the several hundred international SMS messages I send each month, or the hours I spend watching Netflix during my very long daily commute? Can you connect your laptop to it and have Internet access while sitting in the park watching the ducks in a lake? I have a very difficult time believing that you get the same level of service for $8/mo that I get for $60/mo. (and the plan I have for $60/mo in Canada would cost about $120/mo in the US)

Different market segments have different needs. I don't agree with signing a contract or letting them subsidize a phone either, but if you actually need/want a smartphone plan you don't actually save that much by buying the phone outright. The real advantage comes because you can walk at any time when a better deal comes along, not because you can save a ton of cash amortized over a few years.

Re:This is why

[erroneus]

They still make less money. I know and realize I will actually be using the infrastructure owned by AT&T or T-Mobile. But I will also get the best of both as I am currently T-Mobile and AT&T people get better coverage where I work but T-Mobile is better at home. I will get what I want without surprise changes to the terms and conditions.

Re:This is why

[vlm]

In my dumb phone $8/mo era that bought about 80 minutes of 10 cent per minute voice. My commute wasn't long enough to physically use more than about 20 minutes per day even if I literally didn't stop talking the whole way, and I really don't want to be "that guy" who's talking loudly on his phone in the movie theater, or at the nice restaurant, etc. So 80 a month was about right for me. 80 minutes a month is a long term average in that some months were nearly zero while some months were much higher, depends how much I was coordinating travel arrangements while traveling, and whats going on in my life that's "urgent" enough to use an old fashioned phone call.

My current $20/mo provider (republic wireless), basically yes to your questions. Well, I can't physically watch netflix while driving my commute. Mostly I listen to audiobooks which download just fine while on the road, although they download faster on wifi and I can't fool around shopping for any buying while I'm supposed to be driving anyway. I've watched youtube videos while waiting in line, offices, waiting rooms, etc, and its worked just fine. If only I could find more worth watching, then I'd probably watch more videos. SMS is for suckers who like to pay 10 cents per short-email, that's a subculture I actively intentionally avoid, but it does supposedly have unlimited texting although as mentioned I'm not a texter at all. I know it receives texts pretty well because I get about one mistaken and/or moron and/or spammer text per week.

One big difference from your "requirements" is no tethering, but I haven't used a laptop in a non-wifi environment since at least the mid 00s (maybe early 00s, its been awhile) so I haven't missed tethering very much. If I'm in the middle of nowhere, I'm absolutely certain not to be in front of a laptop, but if I really needed web access, I would just use my phone. Cruddy keyboard and tiny display but it'll get the job done... I suppose, however unlikely, if I ever had a need, I'd find a way to tether, even if the provider doesn't like it very much.

Sure I could pay more for stuff I don't want, but that could be said about a lot of things.

Re:This is why

[History's Coming To]

You can keep your number when changing handset and/or provider, even on an unregistered PAYG handset. In the UK, at least.

Not the entire story...

[Anonymous Coward]

As much as the blog poster would like us to believe that is the entire story. It's obviously not.

Here's why.

AT&T has mass data entry (or as CSR's refer to it "Massive Destruction of Effort") which does various things like add missing promotions/features and deleting invalid service plan/feature/promo combinations placed on it by sleezy first and third party sales agents.

In the case of the blog writer, what obviously happened is that the iPhone started using mobile data. In the billing system, there are three classes of devices which I'll just refer to as "dumbphones", "smartphones" and "data devices." A "dumbphone" has a voice plan, and can only opt into optional small data plans. A Data device meanwhile is only a data device and the voice part is optional (since a tablet or usb stick has no voice system.) The Smartphones (previously Windows Mobile and Blackberry devices) require a data plan to work, and the Mass Data Entry system probably detected data use (eg signaling data) without a data plan and forced it onto one to prevent the user from using data for free.

So what the blog writer should have done escalated the problem nicely and told the agent to restore the voice plan to what it was, or cancel the service.

Re:Not the entire story...

[flimflammer]

It would charge more than that. On non-data plans, you get charged a surcharge just to start using data that day. It's a couple bucks a day, plus a rather exorbitant amount per megabyte of data. If gone unchecked, it could easily go beyond the $30/month data plan cost just by letting small amounts of data trickle through each day during the month activating the daily data surcharge. Just on surcharges to activate the daily data mode, a month of service could be between $50-$90 a month.

I love the EU

[drolli]

Euro problems or not, but for the customers its great here in Europe.

I never had the situation here that a mobile provider tried to force me onto a certain mobile phone. The reason for this is that the European union has a lot of laws regarding the availability of services everywhere and that no competitor may have a disadvantage by closed markets. In the same way the mobility of the cititzens should not be limited.

Soemthing like: "If you use the phone which we did not sell you, we charge extra" would bring you into an overkill of lawsuits. Its not accidentally that MS needs to show the "browser choice" screen in Europe. Its not accidentally that Apple and other ebook publisher got got into trouble here. it not accigentally that Apples warranty conditions clashed here. It is not accidentally that the "one mobile provider sell the iphone" idea broke down in the EU more quickly than elsewhere.

Re:I love the EU

[wvmarle]

These situations are US-only. Really. All the rest of the world is as good or better than the EU when it comes to mobile service. Even a country like China is lightyears ahead in that respect.

Re:I love the EU

[Registered Coward v2]

Euro problems or not, but for the customers its great here in Europe.

I never had the situation here that a mobile provider tried to force me onto a certain mobile phone. The reason for this is that the European union has a lot of laws regarding the availability of services everywhere and that no competitor may have a disadvantage by closed markets. In the same way the mobility of the cititzens should not be limited.

Soemthing like: "If you use the phone which we did not sell you, we charge extra" would bring you into an overkill of lawsuits.

Actually, US carriers don't charge extra - they just don't offer a discount and non-contract plans as you go plans are often targeted to people who are total price sensitive (i.e. is it $10 or 430 per card) rather than to the actual cost per minute. There is some movement to offering cheaper no contract plans - Walmart is starting to advertise unsubsidized iPhones with lower per month rates; although their "unlimited" data is really "use more than 2GB per months for a few months and we may not let you renew..." according to the sales rep I talked to when considering it for a second phone.

OTOH, the EU is still in the dark ages when it comes to roaming - why can't my UK SIM work the same way throughout the EU - no charge for incoming calls, same low per minute or text rate everywhere? Roaming fees may be capped but why should there be any? After all, in the US you can roam virtually anywhere; at least with the big 4, for one flat rate.

Re:I love the EU

[drolli]

Offerign discount plans for a certain group of customers means charging the others extra.

The roaming is a historical artifact (since most big european providers did not exist for a very long time), and the EU is slowly driving it down. O2 UK, O2 Germany, and O2 Spain may be owned by the same company, but may operate different networks. Sadly, the regulation of the telephone network operation is still a national thing. So you still have one relulatory body per country, with special regulations. A lot about it has happened in the last 25 years. Sadly some things remain (like the oblication to charge for certain things in certain countries). But luckily for you, if you are European they must sell you the same cheap prepaid cards which they also sell for the locals.

Re:I love the EU

[the eric conspiracy]

These situations are also self-inflicted. Plenty of US carriers don't have this brain-dead restriction.

A little effort and the author could have easily found a more appropriate plan.

Re:I love the EU

[cycler]

Sorry......I might be late with the reply but I have to.....

You complain about roaming in Europe compared to the US?

Newsflash:
Europe consists of _different_ countries!!

My apologies, but your post suggests that you have no idea.

/C

Re:I love the EU

[Registered Coward v2]

Sorry......I might be late with the reply but I have to.....

You complain about roaming in Europe compared to the US?

Newsflash: Europe consists of _different_ countries!!

My apologies, but your post suggests that you have no idea.

/C

Actually I do; and think if people want to bit h about the US carriers than comparing service areas and prices is not unreasonable. The US not only has 48 contiguous states but also a number of independent nations plus 2 non-contiguous states and a number of territories. So, apology accepted and perhaps you need to answer the clue phone when it rings to discuss cell phone markets. After all, if consumer protection were so important and the EU so grand who cares about things like national borders if yo gruel are one market with one set of boundary less rules?

Re:I love the EU

[Almir43]

Right. So how's the roaming between USA, Canada and Mexico? That's what i thought.

Re:I love the EU

[Registered Coward v2]

Right. So how's the roaming between USA, Canada and Mexico? That's what i thought.

Depends on your plan; but then again the US , Canada and Mexico don't claim to be one common borderless market. the EU carriers have managed to find an excuse to stick it to their customers because you cross an internal border; that would be like the big 4 US carriers charging roaming fees because someone went from Atlanta to Miami. Years ago they did it but that has all but gone away. The US market has evolved differently and pretty much gone to an unlimited use model for calls - given that after hours and mobile to mobile calls don't use minutes.

Miss Tomlin from the telephone company says

[JazzHarper]

"I want you to understand something: we are not subject to city, state or federal regulation. We are omnEEpotent... OmnEEpotent. That's 'potent' with an 'omnee' in front of it. Now, then, Mr. VEEdal, when may we expect payment?"

Had the same problem, use an MVNO

[mcorner]

It was a frustrating experience for sure, but there is an easy solution: switch to any one of the MVNOs or a prepaid plan from the carrier. Figure out what network they are riding on top of that matches your preference, then switch.

I picked GoPhone (from ATT), but straighttalk wireless, or others will work just fine for you and are likely cheaper.

Good luck, but this is an easy one to solve.

Re:Had the same problem, use an MVNO

[darjen]

Yes, it's really not that hard. People who are complaining just need to do a little more research. I got my wife a used at&t iPhone and put a goPhone sim in it. works fine. I had my Droid 2 on page plus for quite a while, and that worked fine too. I eventually got rid of my Droid 2. Now I have a galaxy nexus with a verizon lte iPad sim card. I don't make that many calls so that works fine for me. I get 2gb for $30/month with the iPad's data plan. There are many reasonable options depending whether you want just voice or just data.

AT&T logo

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone notice it looks vaguely similar to the Death Star?

Re:AT&T logo

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep.

How did they find out ?

[Alain Williams]

I assume that they did so by looking at some kind of signature from the 'phone when it connects to their network. Can anyone tell us what that is ?

Re:How did they find out ?

[Anonymous Coward]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Mobile_Station_Equipment_Identity

Re:How did they find out ?

[realityimpaired]

The IMEI. It includes the phone's make/model and serial number.

Stop rewarding jerk carriers

[Malenx]

There are lots of re-sellers who provide you with the same networks but don't require crap like this. http://www.pagepluscellular.com/ is what my wife uses.

I've deactivated my phone completely and use it with google voice / voip on wifi for free. http://sipdroid.org/

Re:Stop rewarding jerk carriers

[YoungHack]

I use PagePlus too, with a Droid 1. I just turn off the data feature. It's why I chose PagePlus actually, to have a smart phone without the requirement of a data plan. Since they use the same backbone as Verizon (my previous carrier), I get essentially the same service quality I had before.

Re:Stop rewarding jerk carriers

[ggpauly]

On a droid2 I use both Pageplus which resells Verizon, and also as a wifi phone using google voice + grooveIP (less complicated than sipdroid with a one time $2.49 charge.) Google voice gives good to excellent phone quality between Europe & US if you have a good wifi connection. Verizon/pageplus doesn't happen in Europe, so here it's only a wifi phone. Works OK, I make sure i have wifi where I stay. Calls to US free, calls to phones here have per minute charges, as much as 15 US cents to cell phones in Spain. For some reason, I don't feel like wifi-only would be adequate in the US, however Pageplus prepay is cheap if you don't use it a lot ($75/year).

Contracting law

[Anonymous Coward]

Is contracting law so much different in the US from the rest of the world?
As far as I know, both parties must agree on a contract for it to become effective (this is why you need to sign contracts, or click "I agree" on the EULA screens etc.)
So what did your contract with AT&T say? Does it (or the general Terms & Conditions) mention anything about you only being allowed to use non-smartphones and needing a Data Plan if you use a smartphone? Then, as much as it sucks and as much as I hate to say it, they are in the right.

No mention of Data Plans and Smartphones? Get a lawyer - they are not Darth Vader, they cannot just "change the deal".

Re:Contracting law

[ACluk90]

Then, as much as it sucks and as much as I hate to say it, they are in the right.

No, they are not. Well, maybe in the US you can throw out all your rights by making a contract. But I want to give you an example of what happened here in Switzerland a few years ago (and Switzerland has one of the weakest customer protection laws in Europe):

All ISPs advertised and made contracts for 'upto xxx MBit/s', this was general industry practice. Suddenly there was a court ruling invalidating almost all of these contracts. Why? You signed that you give them money and they did not promise any service ('upto xxx' can also be 0 MBit/s). Thus these contracts were one-sided and could thus never be in the sense of one of the parties. They were thus invalid.
Solution: Now they all include a minimum bandwidth in their contracts and have to face compsation demands when their service is not working (as they are in breach of the contract in this case).

Re:Contracting law

[RatherBeAnonymous]

It is in the wireless customer agreement. http://www.att.com/shop/en/legalterms.html?toskey=wirelessCustomerAgreement#whatDataMsgServicesOffer Section 6.3.

6.3 What Are The Voice And Data Plan Requirements?

A voice plan is required on all voice-capable Devices, unless specifically noted otherwise in the terms governing your plan.

An eligible tiered pricing data plan is required for certain Devices, including iPhones and other designated Smartphones. Eligible voice and tiered pricing data plans cover voice and data usage in the U.S. and do not cover International voice and data usage and charges. If it is determined that you are using a voice-capable Device without a voice plan, or that you are using an iPhone or designated Smartphone without an eligible voice and tiered data plan, AT&T reserves the right to switch you to the required plan or plans and bill you the appropriate monthly fees. In the case of the tiered data plan, you will be placed on the data plan which provides you with the greatest monthly data usage allowance. If you determine that you do not require that much data usage in a month, you may request a lower data tier at a lower monthly recurring fee.

That being said, just because it's in a contract that doesn't mean it's legal. AT&T's arbitration clause prohibits customers from joining class action suits, but allows small claims actions. Last year a California man won against AT&T over throttling on his unlimited data package, but I don't know anyone has sued over this clause in small claims court. Any arbitration results would most likely be kept secret.

Want a Smartphone with no data plan? Use Ting.

[SuperBeaker]

Seriously, go to Ting's web site and check out the pricing. You pick how many minutes, texts, and data you want. If you plan on only using data on your smartphone when you're on wifi, you can do that. We joined Ting about a month ago and couldn't be happier. Our monthly phone bill has plummeted even though we upgraded from feature phones to smartphones (dumping Verizon along the way). You can see the pricing options at https://ting.com/plans

Re: I wanted a smartphone but not a data plan

[TaoPhoenix]

Maybe the answer is to use their own sales processes against them in the opposite direction.

I have an iPhone. On AT&T. With no data plan. That's the spec required here, right?

So let's go play a little. Go to the "stores" aka those mall outlets, rather than someone in corporate. Just like we/they/someone says about Greater ______ ****wad, the workers in those stores have to earn their living doing real work rather than being a faceless voice of policy. So my example is from AT&T. It could be different on those other carriers.

1. Go to AT&T Store. "Hi. I want to end my contract. What if any fees do I need to pay to get out of it?" (Sometimes/often you'll have a minimum left on the "subsidy".) End your contract. Or, if this was that "second hand phone" you might just go to step 2.
2. "I want a Go-Phone plan on this phone. $100, so that the minutes last all year." By making a purchase, you are directing the discussion. There's nowhere for them to wiggle you.

Put facetiously for slashdot humor effect, you can go all baby-steps on this.
"Go-Phone plan. You still sell those, right? I like the Meatloaf ad on TV. He's my hero."
"Yay. Now I can be just like Meatloaf. Or something. Here's $100. In the $100 option the minutes last a whole year right? Good."
GoPhone *doesn't have* data. Since we all know companies don't like giving away stuff for free, and you handed them five $20's, "of course you can't get free data". Which is ... wait for it ... what we wanted. There's nowhere for them to charge anything else because you handed cash to the sales person at an AT&T store.

What about another petition?

[asyn42]

Seems like something worthy of another petition to the Whitehouse, like this one for cell phone unlocking

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7

Put some grass-roots web development and marketing work behind it, and you might get noticed.

They both suck

[Starfleet Command]

I used Sprint. The only true "unlimited" data plan. So far ::::knocking on wood desk::::

Wow

[p0p0]

Is it really just the state of the American system that is so corrupt that a company can get away with this, or is this prevalent elsewhere? Obviously /. features predominantly American news so I can't tell if my views are skewed or not.

If it does seem to be mostly American; Bloody hell you guys need to step up your game. I've never heard of a Canadian company do this. We have Bell, Rogers, Virgin, Telus and WiND and I could never imagine any one of those company doing this. They do some pretty scummy stuff to pull in money, like crazy overage charges, but even the guys with the most push like Bell don't dick around with people that much. These guys are fighting each other over customers constantly. Is there not much choice in America for service providers?

I can't see this being any type of legal. What agreement could possibly allow this and still be upheld in court?
The entire thing is just... my mind...*poof*

Re:Wow

[the eric conspiracy]

It's right in the contract terms. They tell you when you sign the freaking contract.

Shear laziness that's all. There are several carriers in the US that offer much better terms.

You couldn't actually pick a worse carrier for this type of use.

Re:Wow

[Roger Wilcox]

Unfortunately, p0p0, anti-competitive practices have become somewhat of a tradition among telecommunications companies in the USA. It's too bad that the rule of law is dead in this country--there are laws a hundred years old that explicitly forbid the kind of collusion and consumer strong-arming that AT&T and Apple are practicing right now. These companies have become so large and powerful that they have purchased the government and the feds now enable them to maintain their monopolistic practices.

The government should be protecting the competitive marketplace rather than protecting the corporations.

"Proud to be an American?" Hahaha what a joke. Nationalism, if it is to have any value, can only be secondary to rationalism, and no rational American can be proud of this.

Re:T Mobile

[realityimpaired]

This. They'll mail them internationally, as well... my parents bought one for an upcoming road trip through the US (well, driving from Ontario to Florida where they're going to catch a cruise around the carribbean, then driving back a week later), and for $10 they got a prepaid SIM with unlimited incoming texts, low rate for outgoing texts (even international), and a reasonably low per-minute data rate. They can top-off online, or by phone with a credit card, and probably at a retail POS as well.

Plans *do* exist in the states, but they don't usually advertise the good ones on their website because they'd rather you take the $2/day plan.

Re:get a burner phone

[Alain Williams]

If it is not in the contract that he agreed to then the extra $30 is illegal or AT&T have taken the extra $30 'in error'. He must tell AT&T (in writing) that they do not have the authority to take the extra $30 from his bank account. When (I though of saying 'if', but the bully expects to be able to do what they want) they do then tell his bank that $30 was not authorised and give them a copy of the correspondence -- the bank will then have to refund the $30.

I assume that there is a direct debit guarantee similar to what we have in England.

Re:Straight Talk

[fair use]

After my AT&T contract expired, I switched to Straight Talk for my iPhone. $45/month unlimited everything (well, not unlimited data but a lot of data). They also use AT&T's network. Its been working great.

Switched from ATT

[Anonymous Coward]

Same thing happened to me when I popped my sim into a smartphone for 4 days before switching back to my dumbphone. They charged me $65 for two months and were unapologetic. I ended up switching to Republic Wireless. You have to pay $250 for a new phone, but you only get charged $20 a month for unlimited everything. The "helpful" ATT service rep warned me Republic charges a roaming fee (which they don't) when I cancelled the account.

So far I'm pretty happy with my new phone. It uses Sprint towers when I'm outside so the signal bars are usually lower but useable. Most of the time I'm using wifi at home and at work.

Why AT&T

[the eric conspiracy]

So why would anyone pick AT&T if they wanted a non-data service on a smartphone that they owned outright?

These horrific contract terms are well publicized and there is plenty of discussion on the internet about it.

Plus AT&T has high rates and no discounts for people who have their own phones.

There are many services that offer far better deals than AT&T. I am in a similar position in that I own my own phone; I happen to use T-Mobile which offers a variety of plans. None of which lock you into a long term contract and there is no requirement that you buy a data plan if you don't want one.

There is no particular reason to buy into these ridiculous plans - there is plenty of diversity available, with plans that would likely suit you much better.

It really is your own fault that you got skewered this way.

Petition for DOJ to Prosecute Against this Here:

[Slicker]

I just started this Petition. Please SIGN IT! Fight these !#@$ EXPLETIVES #@@

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/order-doj-prosecute-3-major-cell-carriers-forcing-smartphone-customers-buy-data-plans/rVCM7bj0?utm_source=wh.gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl

Thanks!

Spend their time (dime).

[brindafella]

When ever you feel like it, and have a few spare minutes, call up their call centre using free-call number (that costs the company) and spend a few minutes (or as long as you can spare) complaining about this matter. It racks up a cost to the company. Even better, mention why you call (to cost them more than what they are charging you) in the conversation. Eventually, they will escalate it and someone at a higher level MAY decide to call it 'even' and disconnect you from the plan. This strategy worked for me with a similar company......some years ago...... eventually.

Re:Spend their time (dime).

[ultrasawblade]

Careful now, otherwise they may kick you out of their network: http://gizmodo.com/275374/sprint-dumps-needy-customers

Been there on this one.

[arekin]

For a while a few of my friends and I were on a family share plan with AT&T. One of my friends had his phone die and started using his girlfriends unused iPhone. Sure enough after a month we started seeing the extra data plan on the bill. Called AT&T, and not only were we told that he would be charged for using the data plan, but he was not due for an upgrade despite having never signed a contract for his line to begin with (he had his phone from a previous plan). While we are not still in a family plan, every one of us have switched to sprint, who are not only significantly cheaper, but also have way better customer service.

Re:Been there on this one.

[arekin]

"he was not due for an upgrade despite never having signed a contract"

You *don't* want to sign a contract, but yet you still want to periodically get free or cheap upgrades to newer phones?

Facepalm.

Its not that we don't want to sign a contract, he didn't because he bought his phone off contract about 6 months before his old contract ended (same provider, was not on our plan at the time) and didn't need a new phone. When almost 2 years later that phone failed he started using his girlfriends iPhone (she had dropped her service.) When he was told that he would have to pay for a data plan he decided to sign the contract and get a new dumb phone and they said he wasn't due for another 4 or 5 months. At&t acknowledged that he didn't have a contract but still wouldn't give him the contract discount.

Re:Old news by couple of 5 years

[Overzeetop]

1) If cell data is off on the phone, it won't use data - unless the carrier is specifically bypassing the user settings to gather data (which, generally, it won't...I used to have an AT&T iPhone 4 with 200MB of data a month. If I got close to my limit, which only happened twice in about 3 years, I would turn off cell data off.)

Besides, why would they not put a data block on his phone if he requested it? It's an option in their system (for said children for whom streaming a couple gigs of youtube a day seems commonplace), why not just allow it? It's not like they're subsidizing his iPhone purchase.

Re: I wanted a smartphone but not a data plan

[Anonymous Coward]

Result: AT&T cancels your GoPhone plan for violating the terms of use you are forced to submit yourself to in order to use the AT&T service. Ask me how I know.

Game over.

This happened to me, too.

[Anonymous Coward]

I borrowed a friend's old iPhone for app development and testing. AT&T discovered it was "on" and started charging my friend for another line even though it was not making calls or accessing data and had no phone number. He had to call and argue with them to take of the charges.

You need to keep an eye on your AT&T bills.

Re:This happened to me, too.

[tgd]

I borrowed a friend's old iPhone for app development and testing. AT&T discovered it was "on" and started charging my friend for another line even though it was not making calls or accessing data and had no phone number. He had to call and argue with them to take of the charges.

You need to keep an eye on your AT&T bills.

Or, you know... pull the SIM card when you're not using phone and data.

I've been using my old iPhone for a couple years that way.

Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[tepples]

The contract has a termination clause which generally works out fairly close to a fair price for the subsidy he got on his original phone.

The ETF with a new phone works out to roughly $15 per month over the course of a 24-month contract. Why doesn't the price of service drop by $15 starting on the twenty-fifth month? And why does bringing one's own unlocked GSM smartphone, buying a voice-only plan, and using Wi-Fi for all data result in a data plan getting crammed onto the customer's bill?

Re:Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[Rhys]

Because despite having fallen off contract, the sucker blogger wasn't bright enough to get off a contract plan and onto one of the various, usually cheaper, monthly plans.

Then if AT&T or any other provider dicks you around with your monthly (like T-mob is with their "no tethering on the unlimited data plan"), you can either 1) break the terms of the plan, because you can always go buy a new sim and top-up cards from a physical store and they can't track you and block your credit card or 2) jump to a different provider.

Sure there's the inconvenience of a new number, but that's what google voice and similar services are for.

Re:Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[jbolden]

That $15 / mo is going up in the last two quarters.

The reason you bill doesn't decrease is the carriers long ago realized that the total qualify of your cellular experience is heavily dependent on the quality of your handset. Consumers systematically under appreciate this, so carriers are acting in the public's interest by creating structures to shift costs from the monthly reoccurring side of the ledger to the biennial handset purchase.

As for why carriers don't let you use smartphones with no data plan. The FCC is encouraging mixed pricing in the prepay market. In the postpay market many parts of plans are run at a loss and others are sold at outrageous markups. This tends to all net out to a fair price but they aren't setup to allow people to carve up these plans a la carte. The prepay plans are setup for that.

Re:Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[PKFC]

What about porting your number? In theory, it works in Canada - I've never done it personally, but I was damn near thinking of doing that with an unlocked phone every month or two - except for the fact that Bell and Telus are the same network so it wouldn't matter. But no carrier here offers a discount to bringing your own phone afaik... And then there are the 3 year contracts up here... Blah..

Re:Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[jbolden]

I've ported numbers. The carriers allow it and make it sensibly straight forward enough.

Re:Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[yoshi_mon]

A while ago my Blackberry was not only pretty dated but out of its contract. I still was on a contract billing plan, something I did not fully appreciate until today in fact, but I could a) get a new subsidized phone from Sprint and begin a new contract, b) continue on with my old BB, or c) leave Sprint.

Sprint's service in my area and monthly charge were both good enough such that I tried plan A for a while. However due to the fact that my F&F plan just had a BB data add on fee they told me that if I was going to get any current model smartphone that I would have to move to a data plan. And of course that change would up my monthly bill overall with no added service.

They tried to justify that increase in cost to me by saying that a more modern smartphone "used more data". Asked them to provide proof of that from my old BB to a current one and they could not. They did point to iPhones and Androids as syncing data and when I asked if that was new they would just go back to the line that newer phones do it moar!

This caused me not to do anything until my old BB finally died. At which point I was plenty pissed at Sprint and set about looking at other options. I ended up going with a pre-paid/no-contract carrier where I had to buy my phone with cash. However my bill went down by a very good amount, my overall user experience stayed the same (it actually went up but that had to do with moving to Android over a BB), and the only negative was that I lost the ability to roam.

I can't honestly see myself going back to a contracted experience at this point. To me the US cell market's business model is very bad for customers but hides that fact well.

Re:Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[Chirs]

... the carriers long ago realized that the total qualify of your cellular experience is heavily dependent on the quality of your handset.

Um, no. The quality of your data usage may be...but for voice/text I'm using an ancient Blackberry with no data plan and it works just fine.

Re:Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[jbolden]

No the quality your experience. I meant what I said. I can imagine an older BlackBerry is a very nice dumb phone and you are having a better experience with that than you would with a $50 phone. I'm unclear how that would contradict my position.

Re:Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[TMB]

If prepay is setup to do a la carte on the plans, then why does AT&T require a data plan for smartphones *even on prepay plans*? I don't have a cell phone right now because AT&T is the only carrier that has decent coverage at home, I only make about 2-3 calls a month so a monthly plan would obviously be ludicrous, but I want a smartphone to use wifi, which is available most everywhere I spend time.

Re:Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[meustrus]

The carriers don't "allow" it, they are required by law to support customers keeping their existing phone numbers. That service costs money and as we all know (it's the gist of this entire discussion) cell providers really hate to spend money in any way that might create customer loyalty.

Re:Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[jbolden]

Porting is sort of an anti-loyalty program if you think about it.

Re:Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[jbolden]

There are a ton of AT&T MVNOs. I think Net10 will allow you to do that. StraightTalk... I'd just make a 1/2 dozen phone calls.

Re:Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[bingoUV]

Loyalty to a corporation is quite idiotic if you think about it.

Re:Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[jbolden]

Why? As a customer you have to decide to whom to give your business generally on partial information. Companies do vary in their quality and ethics. A company with a tradition of treating you well and being ethical is more likely to do so in the future. Moreover company's products have serial correlation in terms of tradeoffs. If they make ones you approve of that's more likely in the future.

Re:Why doesn't price drop after phone is paid off?

[bingoUV]

If selection of a service provider is based on a rational balance of probabilities, it is not loyalty. If not, it is idiotic.

But Vader is the spokesman for Verizon

[Overzeetop]

Looks like the Empire is playing both sides in this game...

Re:get a burner phone

[the eric conspiracy]

It's in the contract.

This is just consumer laziness. There are other carriers that don't have terms like this.

Here's what I got...

[mholve]

Using a SIM card from a Motorola RAZR in an iPhone worked for many years - and why not? I never used the data side. Ever. One day I get an email from AT&T saying I've been put into a data plan, with no options out.

Dear Valued Customer,

We hope you are enjoying your iPhone! We appreciate and value your business and want to be sure you are aware of a change we've made to your account to ensure you have the best possible experience with data usage in the United States.

iPhones are made for data consumption-surfing the web, social networking, email and more. That's why we require an iPhone data plan in conjunction with our iPhones. This ensures that customers with data intensive devices are not unpleasantly surprised with high data pay-per-use charges.

For whatever reason, our records indicate your iPhone does not have an eligible data plan. We have added an appropriate data plan for your iPhone.

If you would like to select another iPhone data plan or have questions, please call 1-800-331-0500 (or 611 from your wireless phone). You can also visit www.att.com/myATT to manage your account. For additional information about iPhone plan requirements visit www.att.com/dataplans.

Thank you for being an AT&T customer. We look forward to continuing to provide you with a great iPhone experience.

Sincerely,

AT&T

Democracy has failed?

[hessian]

Where you live, the government looks out for its constituents, the people.

Here in the U.S., the government looks out for its constituents, the corporations.

But how can that be?

The people have the vote, freedom of speech and assembly, and their own media.

How is it that these bad outcomes can take place given all the safeguards we've put in, including giving power to the people?

Or is it that apathy, laziness, narcissism and general stupidity (that ugly bell curve of unequal human ability) won out?

If that's the case, democracy has failed.

What do you think?

Re:Democracy has failed?

[dfeifer]

Yes, people have a vote, but they only have a vote between the presented candidates which are usually backed by corporate interests. Running for office is very expensive here and unless you are rich to begin with or have sponsorship generally you don't go very far.

Re:Democracy has failed?

[cdrguru]

You are depending on the people to vote intelligently. This is like expecting a child to intelligently walk away from the feast of candies and cakes. Everyone in the US is looking for the candies and cakes and how that affects other people, people working and paying bills, is of no consequence.

The "official" government unemployment rate is 7.9%. That considers only people actively looking for work right now. If you count the people delivering pizzas with college degrees and the people that just gave up looking it is a far, far larger number and one that is difficult to pin down. Some estimates put it as high as 30% of the population. That means there could be as many as 100 million people out there counting on handouts, candies and cakes, from the government.

Nobody is going to get elected without promising big handouts.

The people that have a job aren't interested in much other than keeping their job and getting their debt paid down. Less than 60% of the people in the US voted in the last election - probably because they were not interested in the size of the handout going to other people.

Re:Democracy has failed?

[the eric conspiracy]

I think Congress has become too dependent on corporations for financing the acquisition of their office.

Time to amend the Constitution to place limits on corporate speech. That's all that is really needed.

Android pod touch?

[tepples]

Don't like it, don't buy a smartphone. If you want an idevice, then get an iPod.

So what should i get if I want an Android 4 device but I want to use it on Wi-Fi? Stores tend not to carry the Galaxy Player, and it runs Android 2.x whose SSL stack can't access web sites that use SNI. And how is having to carry two devices and keep both charged separately good for the customer?

Re:Android pod touch?

[realityimpaired]

So what should i get if I want an Android 4 device but I want to use it on Wi-Fi?

A carrier whose terms of service don't require you to have a data plan for a smartphone.

... And probably the wherewithal to call the carrier up and request that they block data use.

Re:Android pod touch?

[tepples]

A carrier whose terms of service don't require you to have a data plan for a smartphone.

Which U.S. carrier might that be, keeping in mind this comment?

Re:Android pod touch?

[shutdown -p now]

Judging by the answers to the comment you've linked to, it's T-Mo.

Re:Android pod touch?

[CronoCloud]

AT&T, via Go Phone.

No, Really. You can have an AT&T smartphone without a data plan if:

!. You get a go-phone.

2. transfer a sim from a non-smartphone into it.

OR

3. Activate the smartphone's sim online, NOT via the phone itself. If you activate it in the phone it will require you to sign up for the smartphone plan.

Re:Petition for DOJ to Prosecute Against this Here

[davecb]

Surely it's criminal, even in the United States?

In Canada it's arguably "obtaining money upon a false and fraudulent pretense", under S 361 of the Criminal Code. For amounts less than $5,000.00, it entitles one to two years of penal servitude.

Perhaps you should petition your local desk sergeant.

--dave

Re:repeat of recent story which you didn't read

[rufty_tufty]

To summarize your post.
"I realise that a company has screwed you over. You are an idiot because knowing what you know now you should have gone to someone else."
I'm sorry but no!
The point is they have been amoral and done something at could screw over other people. The world needs to hear this and the company should be dragged through the coals because of this.
Not that it will happen mind and yes really the only way a consumer can attack a large company is to take their business elsewhere, but that is only painfull to a company if lots of people do it.

I have some, but not a lot, of sympathy

[pem]

Yeah, AT&T's a dickhead company.

But honestly, one of the reasons I haven't gotten a smartphone on AT&T is exactly this reason. It's in their documentation. I read it, decided they were dickheads, and chose a different option.

So it's good to have this cautionary tale, but the real parable is that, when you sign a contract with anybody, but particularly a known dickhead, read the fine print up front. The news that dickheads will be dickheads -- well, that's not really news, is it? The question "Are they allowed to do this?" is much better asked before you sign a contract, yet after you have examined all your other options, and have decided whether it is worth it to risk being found out.

Same Thing Happened to Me...

[No Grand Plan]

I had a (Google-bought) Nexus One I was in the process of rooting it when it decided to call home; I hadn't set up the Wi-Fi yet, so it called over the network. A couple of weeks later I was notified that AT&T had switched me to a data plan ( I'd been using it exclusively on Wi-Fi until then). I was okay with paying the very small amount for the data I'd used, but I didn't have any intention of staying on a plan that included anything but voice. A quick call to at later, and they'd taken the data plan off and switched me back to my voice-only plan. Of course, that was a year ago...

Happened to me; easily reversed

[loshwomp]

AT&T tried this on me, twice in five years. The first time was immediately after I accidentally launched the "browser" in my ancient Treo 650.

Each time a simple phone call was all that we needed to have them undo it. Annoying, yes, but probably not even on the top 20 list of things I hate about AT&T.

Re:Happened to me; easily reversed

[vsny]

I have the same issue with my old windows HTC smartphone. However I'm able to call and undo the data plan upgrade because old smartphones are grandfathered into the non-data plan options. I remember seeing some literature on this 3 or 4 years ago. Try this with a modern smartphone - I don't think they'll be so courteous and downgrade your plan.

Re:Happened to me; easily reversed

[ineffablepwnage]

Once the smartphone revolution started to happen, AT&T started trying to screw me over on data. I had one of the free bricks that they give you when you're not willing to spend any money on a phone, and was on a family plan. I kept getting data charges from them, despite never using data, or even being able to, although a call would get the charges reversed. One month I just left my phone plugged in, but never used it. At the end of the month, guess what happened? Got charged for using data. AT&T just adds on whatever charges that most people incur and hope that people don't notice it, or the people DO use it and just think they've been caught.

What?

[bogaboga]

Best economic engine on the planet...

--->> Financed or propped up by debt especially to China and Japan, right?

This is EXACTLY why I left AT&T.

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought an iPhone free and clear.

I was out of contract with AT&T at this juncture, and I had the lowest cost plan. I probably
had 150 minutes of talk time used per month at most so I was not exactly using
the maximum allowed service under my contract, which permitted 450 minutes per
month of talk time.

The next month I noticed that I was being charged $30 more for data, which I was NOT using.

So I called AT&T and I made sure the call was "escalated" to a level which would allow me
to talk with an AT&T employee who wasn't going to just recite lines from a script.

So when I finally got to a person who had some authority and some knowledge, what
I heard was : "You don't have a choice".

Ahh, but my dear sweet little AT&T service rep ( you nasty ill-mannered
officious self-important little bitch ) I most certainly DO have a choice.

I left AT&T that week, because I was out of contract and could do it painlessly.

I would rather use carrier pigeons than ever use AT&T again.

FUCK AT&T.

Re:AT&T alignment

[um... Lucas]

They're relying on contract law. If that's not lawful evil, I don't know what it.

Go data only

[GrahamJ]

I'm pretty surprised at how many /.ers are willing to buy data in the form of voice minutes and SMS at extorsionate rates but not a proper data plan. Since voice and SMS are data anyway, why not get a data-only plan? I set up a tablet data plan and use it on my smartphone and even with the addition of premium VoIP service (from voip.ms, great service) I'm saving $40/month over my old voice+data plan.

Data by audio

[History's Coming To]

I've got an old landline phone and a rubber cups modem - I assume I now need to buy a data plan even though it's not capable of carrying the data in the way that AT&T want it to?

Simple solution - they can change the contract if they want, but you can simply walk away from it at that point. Companies are (legally) allowed to be dicks if they want, they just risk losing money. You can either whine or stop giving them money, it's a fairly simple choice.

Not worth it to buy a phone outright

[oic0]

They do this to make it not worth it to buy a phone outright... and then its oh well, might as well sign a contract and pay less for the same phone since I'm going to have to pay subsidizing data rates anyway. Yes it should be illegal. You can change the phones IMEI though so they can't recognize it. A long time ago I had a chinese smart phone and ATT treated it just like a dumb phone because of the IMEI.

Why Not Just Go Prepaid?

[Plekto]

AT&T and several other carriers have prepaid (Android) smartphones. I have one and simply didn't buy a data plan. So it doesn't work at all unless I am in a hotspot or similar free area and then I can turn the data on manually.

What many people don't realize is that it's not the carrier at fault here but Apple. Apple mandates in their contracts with the providers that every iPhone has to have a data plan included. So if you go to a different type/brand of smartphone, you're able to order services individually.

AT&T's prepaid service is actually quite decent. I bought an Android phone for $99 and that was that. I can go to the app store, buy programs, use the GPS, the FM radio (it's not web-based radio), and have all of the functions of a smartphone other than data. For not a dime per month. Essentially I have a $99 iPod Touch since the apps are identical in almost every case.

Verizon doesn't have prepaid smartphones. None of the 10 cent a minute options are real smartphones. If you get a tablet or smartphone, they require a data plan.

T-Mobile does let you do this. But their phones are much more money, typically.

NOTE - you usually must buy a phone that is prepaid. Many can be upgraded to full service but almost none of the contracted/full service phones can be downgraded to prepaid. This isn't a technological problem but a contractual one with the phone makers and the providers. Yes, the prepaid can be downgraded and upgraded each month as you need them to be, if that's what you desire.

at&t sucks (but you already knew that)

[kcmastrpc]

AT&T does have plans where you can use your iphone without a data plan. They are pay as you go, and you pretty much have to threaten to cancel your service and go to one before they offer it to you. .10/minute or text, no data. minutes expire after 3 months of no use. it exists, badger there customer support rep for it. otherwise, they'll require your smartphone to have a contract/data plan.

You?

[Frankie70]

Hmm, now who said that?

As per google, you are the only one who said it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22I+have+altered+the+details+of+our+arrangement%2C+pray+I+do+not+alter+it+any+further%22

THIS +++

[rwade]

Yeah, MVNOs are really the best way to get away from such corporate policies.

Surprised it took them so long

[ysth]

As far as I can tell, they *immediately* detect any new phone; you can even look on their website and they will show you what phone you last used.

The whole data-plan thing is nuts. (The whole contract-subsidized phones thing is nuts too, but that's a different issue.) There's no reason you can't have a smartphone and just use its data features via WiFi if you want. That said, I thought AT&T was pretty consistent about this and am surprised to hear reports here of people getting out of the data plan. Maybe that was actually with "feature phones", not "smart phones"?

With respect to dumb phones, AT&T sells them; no need to get a used one. Yes, the selection is kind of limited, and they charge more if you wish to decline a new 2-year contract, but not all that much more (depending on the phone). I've even (several times) gone into an AT&T store and they've let me buy a very cheap Go Phone to replace a lost phone, even when I was eligible for a new subsidized phone but explicitly said I didn't want another 2-year agreement. (I think in either of those cases they are at least supposed to charge you $5 for a new sim, but they haven't actually done so.)

Re:Surprised it took them so long

[countach]

I wonder how they detect it. You'd think there'd be some way to hack your iPhone or jailbreak it and have it report a different kind of phone.

Re:What?

[the eric conspiracy]

Not really.

China, for example only owns about 8% of US debt, slightly more than a trillion or so.

Also, the US holds almost as much foreign debt as foreign countries hold US debt, at a ratio of 9/10. In addition US investors tend to buy higher yielding securities off shore than foreign investors buy in the US, so US investors generally earn more income, meaning the net balance of payments is positive to the US.

So the idea that the US is propped up by foreign debt is pretty dumb.

Which carriers might these be?

[tepples]

there are lots of other carriers that don't have this type of terms in their contracts.

Which carriers might these be? The big four national carriers all appear to have this term.

Re:Which carriers might these be?

[flimflammer]

He's also wrong, as T-Mobile won't force you into a data plan automatically if you use a smartphone. In fact, when I first activated my smartphone, I intended to use only wifi. I disabled 3G but part of the old 2G stuff wasn't disabled proper, so a tiny amount of data was leaking out as part of how Android does its business, and it incurred charges against me. After talking with T-Mobile and making my data intentions known, they wiped the $15 or so I'd already incurred (there's like a $3/day data usage fee if you don't have a data plan or something), and that was the end of any trouble I had.

Yes you can

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok so yes you can have a data phone on AT&T, but you have to be out of contract. Call them up and tell them you want a data block on the line. They will still add the block no charge, understand though you will NOT be able to sent picture messages as they use the data network. I have done this for 4+ years now with no problems. Again you have to be out of contract for this to work or they can req. the data be on. You can call all you want and send regular txt with no issue. Also if its android 4.x or higher you can turn the data off in the phone for added security.

Yes it does

[Sycraft-fu]

I know it is popular to hate on America, but if you are going to do it, you might want to check up on it first. You wanna see bad phone service? Check out Canada. The carriers there dick you around badly. Expensive, not a lot of choice, long contracts (3 year) and poor service (for example the phones are prone to roam to US networks if you live near the border, which most Canadians do, and the Canadian companies charge you tons when it happens).

Also, how's that Internet going for you in New Zealand? Enjoying 50GB a month for $85 (the current offer on telecom.nz)? Sometimes I'll do more than 50GB in a day, on a single system, if I'm reinstalling a bunch off of Steam. Nary a peep from my ISP, not any extra charges.

All nations have good and bad points.

Not everybody drives; some people ride the bus

[tepples]

Well, I can't physically watch netflix while driving my commute.

There appears to be a disconnect on Slashdot between people who use public transit and people who drive.

SMS is for suckers who like to pay 10 cents per short-email

Or for people who happen not to carry a mobile device capable of long-email, which may be because (as the article points out) carriers charge customers so much more per month just to use a device capable of long-email.

I haven't used a laptop in a non-wifi environment since at least the mid 00s

I use a laptop on a city bus on the way to and from work.

if I really needed web access, I would just use my phone.

So what would you do if you needed to copy and paste between the web and your laptop? Do phones support clipboard sharing on an ad-hoc Wi-Fi network yet?

Re:Not everybody drives; some people ride the bus

[vlm]

So what would you do if you needed to copy and paste between the web and your laptop? Do phones support clipboard sharing on an ad-hoc Wi-Fi network yet?

I've never had to do that, and don't think I ever would. But the solution would probably involve something insane like setting up an adhoc wifi link with static ip addrs between the phone and laptop, then a vnc server on the laptop, and use my phone's VNC client to hopefully vnc compatible cut and paste.

Supposedly you can send files via bluetooth. That would be interesting to see. Stick the cut and paste into a file, send the file via bluetooth, cut and paste outta the file.

Also using less than one month of contract phone cost (or at most, two), you can buy a wifi flash drive, which is pretty much what it sounds like, a wifi accessible micro-nas with a tiny little flash drive. A weird niche product to be sure. Conceptually its the same as a apple airport with a flash drive stuck in the usb port, file sharing turned on, and a battery, in practice its much more portable.

Re: I wanted a smartphone but not a data plan

[big_e_1977]

The GoPhone does have data. It's 1 cent per 5 KB. In other words, it has data, but its completely uneconomical to use.

Which is still not OK

[aepervius]

You should be able legally to force him into the contract ONLY if he use the data at which point you could tell him "you used data on date X/Y/Z at H:M we have evidence in our entwork". If he does not you should not be able to force him into the contract, because you feel like it, that reeks of being the same level of the mafia offering you "protection". In europe you would get slapped. Hard. I am glad I am living on the eastern side of the big pond.

Data cram is more lucrative

[tepples]

Besides, why would they not put a data block on his phone if he requested it?

Because a data cram is far more lucrative than a data block.

It's an option in their system (for said children for whom streaming a couple gigs of youtube a day seems commonplace)

Where would this child be streaming YouTube where there isn't a Wi-Fi signal? On the school bus, where "electronic devices" end up confiscated more often than not?

why not just allow it?

It's possible that a data block is offered only for secondary devices on an AT&T Mobile Share plan.

Simple Solution

[fuzznutz]

If it is REALLY about "supporting" smartphone users without a data plan, why not do the following:

I'm sorry. Your contract does not support smartphone usage. If you are having issues outside the scope of voice calling, please contact your smartphone vendor for technical support. Goodbye...

AT&T doesn't do it because they would rather stick their customers for a $30 per month unencumbered profit increase. I was stuck with AT&T due to my specific coverage areas, and left for a Straight Talk AT&T SIM card so I could use an iPhone. I ended up paying $5 more per month for unlimited data, voice, & SMS vs. 450 minutes per month and NOTHING ELSE! If Tracfone/Straight Talk can do it and make money, AT&T should be able too. It's their own damn towers...

Cellular for urgencies

[tepples]

If you deactivate your cellular service entirely, then what do you do when you're stuck in a place with no Wi-Fi (or with Wi-Fi for employees only) and need a ride home?

Re:Cellular for urgencies

[ggpauly]

Maybe that's the difference between Europe & US. Europe has public transportation, US, specifically central NC, does not have reliably available PT.

This is one of the most corrupt US political areas. Commuter rail in the Raleigh area has been repeatedly sabotaged by insiders. Rail to the major airport (RDU) was squashed by airport authority, most likely to keep the parking concession. The Raleigh transportaion authority sold off the property they owned for a rail staion just before the plans that would use it were made. They claimed they needed the money. For what?

Re:Cellular for urgencies

[1u3hr]

If you deactivate your cellular service entirely, then what do you do when you're stuck in a place with no Wi-Fi (or with Wi-Fi for employees only) and need a ride home?

Shoot up a flare. Or, if you don't have a flare gun, ask to use one of the phones on every desk/bar/whatever.

OPT into CONTRACT?

[Anonymous Coward]

How can someone opt you into a contract? To me, that sounds fundamentally illegal. Just tell them it's not something you can afford on your budget. Nobody can opt you into a contractual obligation toward them. Was this somehow stated on a contract you signed?

Now if they want to give you that service for free, that's a different matter. But to obligate you with fees that you never originally agreed to - that's just wrong and illegal. You shouldn't be held liable for that.

Re:OPT into CONTRACT?

[jythie]

Generally they include both 'we can change anything at any time' and 'you are not allowed to sue, instead you must use binding arbitration with a service we choose and pay' clauses.

While the US has a 'sue happy' reputation, the reality is that suing companies is very hard and unlikely to succeed. Much of the 'reputation' is being spread by groups that want 'reform' so they can make it even harder.

One of the problems in this case is carriers have quasi-government powers (they used to have additional responsibilities and regulation too, but those have mostly vanished), so often they can do things to you that normally you would think only the state can do, and just like sueing the state it is rare for you to be able to do anything because the laws have been written in such a way that says you can't.

Boost and Virgin handsets don't port to Ting

[tepples]

The prepay plans are setup for that.

It's too bad most of the well-known prepaid carriers are CDMA2000. You can't very well bring your own phone because CDMA2000 service in the United States doesn't use a CSIM, and carriers tend not to activate each other's phones. For example, Boost and Virgin handsets don't port to Ting. So you're limited to one carrier's selection of phones, and I've found that a lot of prepaid carriers are stuck with years-old models.

Re:Boost and Virgin handsets don't port to Ting

[jbolden]

That's because of Sprint. Sprint wholesale (the part of Sprint that sells to MVNO) is where Sprint is making most of their money. Sprint retail is fading as a percentage. The MVNOs aren't really setup for the kinds of extensive testing the carriers do. But if you are willing to self support you can generally successfully move between MVNOs assuming the devices are compatible. /.ers should be fine.

Tip

[detritus.]

Virgin = Sprint which has reciprocal roaming agreements with Verizon (at least IIRC until next year). Chances are if Sprint doesn't have any towers in your area, you're actually using Verizon's network without even knowing it.

Re:Tip

[SJHillman]

This is only true for their basic voice service... there are Verizon and ATT towers on my work campus but my Virgin Optimus Slider phone gets no signal even where Verizon gets full strength.

Go-Phone + WiFi droid with GrooVe IP/Google Voice

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm very tempted to break my contract with Verizon and switch to a Go-Phone. Most of the time I'm WiFi enabled either at home or the office, so like the original poster, I don't need data from the wireless carriers. My plan is to:

1. Keep my Droid as a WiFi only device, but have GrooVe IP on it with my Google Voice number. Everybody uses my Google Voice number.
2. Transfer my cellular number (which nobody uses) to a Go-Phone. Have Google Voice forward my calls to this number.
3. Pay $100 for one year of voice calls on the Go-Phone. Only use it when I'm not WiFi connected, so very limited usage.

The one piece I'm missing and would love for a geek to tell me how to do it is:
4. Bluetooth connect my Droid and Go-Phone so that the Droid can be used as a bluetooth headset for the Go-Phone. That way I'd always use the Droid for calls, and would only have to keep the Go-Phone in my pocket or somewhere in my car. Please, somebody tell me how I can do this.

I haven't pulled the trigger on this setup yet, but I'm extremely tempted to.

Surprised?

[bythescruff]

So a giant corporation behaved like a total cocksucker? Colour me a surprised wee bairn...

Fraud

[Chuckstar]

Why, oh why won't anyone ever take big companies like this to task for their fraud?

Verizon billed me $5/month for handset extended. When my handset broke, they refused to honor the insurance because the handset was "more than two years old". But the terms/conditions they give you say nothing about two years. And they kept billing me for a whole year after that period was up. They refused to even refund me the extra year of payments.

Every lawyer I've asked about this confirms that a scheme like that is criminal fraud. But would a prosecutor ever go after them for something like that? NFW

Re:Fraud

[Chuckstar]

"handset extended warranty"

Need to double-check my posts better. :-(

Re:Sleepy day, huh?

[flimflammer]

T-Mobile does not do this. I have a smartphone without a data plan through T-Mobile. The only mention of a data plan was a notice on the phone's specs suggesting a data plan. As long as you disable data capabilities on the phone, you will never incur a charge nor have your plan upgraded against your will.

Verizon too!

[Jager Dave]

There was a point a few years ago, I lost my phone, and was not at a point to replace it immediately, so I bought a cheap Pay-as-you-go phone, and activated it under my contract... Then a friend went "Hey, I still have my Android, since I went to the iPhone, you want it?"... Of course I did. Verizon didn't. They wouldn't let me turn it on for JUST phone service. DEMANDED I had to have a data plan for it.

me: "but I'm not going to use it for data..."
them: "but you could"
me: "only if I had a data plan"
them: "which is why we insist you have a data plan"
me: "so you make people buy a service they're not going to use just because they have the capability to use it?"
them: "Yes, you have a device that uses data."
me: "but I'm not going to use data."
them: "But you can."
me: "No, I cannot, without a data plan."
them: "Which is why we insist you have a data plan."
me: "Your logic would therefore dictate castrating ALL catholic priests, since they have balls, and the capability to use them, but they don't..." (and hung up)

Demanding a data plan on phones JUST because they have data capabilities is just an absolutely stupid idea, and we should probably start a White House petition to stop it. I'll get started on the draft immediately...

AT&T !=customer service

[buss_error]

I've had charges on my home wired account for the past 2 years I never authorized, don't want, and have no need for. I can't get them to stop it either. I'm getting ready to move, and part of my move considerations will be a CLEC is available.

I'd cancel the line, but it's needed for EMS and alarm system. I could switch those over to a cell phone, but the charge is more than what AT&T dings me for.

Re:What?

[bogaboga]

So the idea that the US is propped up by foreign debt is pretty dumb.

It is definately dumb to dumb people. But for those who know that without borrowing in the last few weeks, the government would shut down, the idea that the US is propped up by foreign debt is real.

It might sound terrible but it's true. Reckless spending with no corresponding income coming in, is the problem. I can see through your pride as you furnish those numbers but the governent and the markets on the other and know the facts --- which are amaemic!

14 day return policy...

[DontScotty]

You DO get to try it out...

"An early termination fee (ETF) may still be charged by your carrier unless you cancel service according to their respective policy: 14 days from the date your device is shipped for AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon"

You turn it in before 14 days (of shipment if ordered remotely, or on delivery if you go buy it from a store).

Which, invalidates your 'you have a much better case to have the contract thrown out as you obviously were not able to make an informed decision before signing (part of the basis of contract law)'. [And, if you bother to read the contracts, you agree to ARBITRATION instead of court action.]

I am not a lawyer. Just someone who reads for comprehension.

Perhaps, instead of the usual complaints....

[sgt_doom]

. . . you will take the time and effort to ascertain who really owns AT&T (and has the controlling interest, BTW, in Mitre Corp. and Monsanto). Instead of assuming some fantasy-like monolithic corporation, with no ownership (which everyone appears to believe today thanks to massive undertaking of "indoctrinated ignorance").

Re:What?

[the eric conspiracy]

I notice you don't provide any numbers to back up your (inaccurate) claims.

Here's one for you to consider. If the US were to impose the same tax rates that are in effect in Canada, the government would be running a balanced budget.

The deficit the US is currently running is somewhere between 6-7 percent of GDP. It could easily be corrected if Congress were willing to actually do it.

Russia is also in Europe

[Cyberax]

Well, if we start comparing country sizes - Russia totally wins. Yet in most cities in Russia phone coverage is far better than I'm currently experiencing in San-Francisco. For example, I can't remember when I had a no-coverage zone in Moscow inside a building, and it happens constantly in SF.

Of course, there are lots of uncovered zones between cities (especially in the Asian part of Russia).

Re:Russia is also in Europe

[Gription]

Part of Russia is in Europe... A comparatively small part. There is that whole "Asia thing" going on.
Russia doesn't give Europeans a sense of scale. When they pay attention to Russia at all they can pretty much ignore anything east of the Urals. Technically it has size but its population (all of Russia is less then half of the US) isn't spread across the country the way it is in the US. Looking at the road map of the vast majority of Russia gives you el'zippo. No roads, no towns, nothing. Go to Wyoming which is pretty empty (about twice the population of Huntington Beach) and there are roads everywhere.

Terms and Conditions continue with use -

[DontScotty]

Read your - Wireless Customer Agreement (AKA Terms & Conditions) - you can google this if you don't know the website for att dot com.

Terms and Conditions continue with use - NOT only with the 2 year contract. Terms and Conditions are ongoing when you use the service, and pay the bill. READING is FUN-da-mental! [IANAL nor a company shill, I just believe in people eventually being smart enough to gather information and make informed decisions. Don't like a carrier? Don't use them, or use them via Pre-Pay 2nd hand carrier. IT WORKS!]

6.3 What Are The Voice And Data Plan Requirements?
A voice plan is required on all voice-capable Devices, unless specifically noted otherwise in the terms governing your plan.

An eligible tiered pricing data plan is required for certain Devices, including iPhones and other designated Smartphones. Eligible voice and tiered pricing data plans cover voice and data usage in the U.S. and do not cover International voice and data usage and charges.

-TLDR Idiots, Start Here-

If it is determined that you are using a voice-capable Device without a voice plan, or that you are using an iPhone or

• designated Smartphone without an eligible voice and tiered data plan, AT&T reserves the right to switch you to the required plan or plans

and bill you the appropriate monthly fees. In the case of the tiered data plan, you will be placed on the data plan which provides you with the greatest monthly data usage allowance. If you determine that you do not require that much data usage in a month, you may request a lower data tier at a lower monthly recurring fee.

Hmm...

[Demena]

I am in Australia. I have a minimal plan. Found overage wherever I want to go. Australia is the size of the USA (possibly excluding Alaska) but has less than one tenth of the population. We seem to do OK.

Re:Hmm...

[BrokenHalo]

Found overage wherever I want to go(...) We seem to do OK.

You don't get out much, do you? Unless you really *do* mean you're overage.

Re:Hmm...

[Demena]

Actually I am "overage". But nevertheless I don'y find coverage bad here. Okay, so in lots of places when you are off the main roads or halfway up a mountain the roadside coverage is spotty or bad but when I am playing tourist I don't really care. In the towns or main roads coverage is pretty good considering "the tyranny of distance". What carrier are you using? I have noticed that some are vastly better than others.

Re:Hmm...

[adolf]

Yes, but don't you all use GSM down there? In the States, we've got variations of CDMA, GSM, PCS, and iDEN, all of which are mutually incompatible, and all fighting for spectrum.

In a place where any one of these were universal, having excellent coverage is only a roaming agreement away. I'm unsurprised that Australia can have excellent coverage even with its relatively sparse population.

But up here, we don't do it that way because it'd be too easy (or something), hence the cellular nonsense that you read about with some frequency on /..

Re:Hmm...

[Demena]

That never occurred to me. All those different standards. We did have CDMA here also for a while but it never really caught on and (I think) that the government eventually took back its spectrum.

There are some advantages to having the government in control of some things. Every function that has been returned to or sold to private enterprise has suffered. We now have toll roads, electrical failures are common, public transport is too expensive to use etc, etc., ad nauseam. There are some advantages to government monopolies and regulations in some areas.

We had a government toll bridge in Melbourne once and they collected tolls for several years - until they figured out that ninety percent of the tolls were spent on collecting it. So they just dropped it. Improved traffic flow increased its carrying capacity and sped up transport considerably

Turns out that government inefficiencies are often better than private enterprise efficiencies and profit.

Re:Hmm...

[parkinglot777]

I believe at least half of Australia continent is desert (in the middle of the continent). Not sure about the density of people living inside the area when it comes to compare with the U.S. inland area. So I guess it is not a good comparison in term of population distribution and land use.

Re:Hmm...

[Demena]

Oh, most comparisons don't work but some do. I once lived in a (mining) town where if you had drawn a circle of a hundred miles radius there would only have been about 5,000 people inside that circle. Internet was dial up at about 6 bits per second. But nowadays it has good cellphone coverage. Within a few more years everyone who does not have fibre to their home will have a radio equivalent with less than satellite lag. (Google "Australia NBN"). Oh! And nine tenths desert would probably be more accurate than fifty percent. Depends on what you call desert I guess.

But what I was originally alluding to is the comment about Europeans coming to grips with size and distance. I once heard a pommie in a pub mention he was a long haul lorry driver and seem proud of it. When I joked that he must have a lot of stamps in his passport he replied than no, he had never needed a passport. Apparently a hundred miles was a "long haul". In many places in Australia that wouldn't have got you to the next petrol (gas) station. Check out "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Highway" you might find it entertaining.

Re:Hmm...

[BrokenHalo]

What carrier are you using? I have noticed that some are vastly better than others.

Since I'm now living in (very) rural Tasmania, I'm using Telstra. Not because it's good, but because it's the best of a bad lot. I sometimes think it's like living in the third world here, except that in the third world you probably get better service.

Re:Hmm...

[Demena]

Well, recently parts of Queensland really have been like the third world. Yet friends in Rockhampton, Yepoon and Bundaberg reported to me no degradation or loss of service from Optus while every other phone carrier lost it. Not that I necessarily recommend Optus.

Google Voice

[xenoc_1]

What will stop you from changing prepaid all the time is the need to keep your number. Unless no-one ever calls you or so, and it doesn't matter that your number changes all the time.

Which is why you use Google Voice, giving out only your Google Voice number to people. I've got a persistent, well-known number for me that all family, friends, colleagues have. They think it's my cell number. Maybe some think it's my home number. The underlying cell phone has changed about a half-dozen or more times, between being a Straight Talk SIM (native T-mobile version so I get HSPA+ on my T-mo ex-contract Android), an ancient Nokia CDMA from Verizon running on PagePlus, a Straight Talk cheapo LG fliphone (CDMA VZ-dominant Sprint-roaming on ST MVNA) when I was spending a lot of time in the intermountain west where GSM sucks, and a Telestial/ekit international roaming SIM that has both a Boston, MA US and a London, UK number, as a way to make my US number ring relatively cheaply when I'm in South America and away from a Gmail page or don't have mobile data/wifi for my GrooVeIP app on the native Uruguay prepaid SIM in the phone.

Nobody has the underlying numbers of any of those phones. If I fly back to the States and decide to reactivate the cheapo POS LG Straight Talk phone for $30 for a month, I just log into Google, point Google Voice to ring at the new phone number, and everyone can still reach me.

Data can be enabled/disabled...

[CrunchyGammaRays]

I worked at AT$T for several years. Part of my job was setting up new accounts and modifying existing accounts. The data feature is just like any other feature in that it can be turned on or off with the click of a mouse. If the feature is turned off, the phone simply cannot use the feature and your data usage will always be zero. The $30 each month is just a BS scam based on policy more than anything else.

So, masquerade as a dumb phone

[1u3hr]

AT&T eventually figured out he was making calls from a smartphone

OK, so the phone is ID-ing istself . It's an IPhone. Is theer an app that lets you masquerade as another device?

It might also be useful in dodging malware targeted at your hardware, as well as the phone company picking your pocket.

Re:So, masquerade as a dumb phone

[1u3hr]

Stupid typos -- try again:

AT&T eventually figured out he was making calls from a smartphone

OK, so the iPhone is ID-ing itself . Is there an app that lets you masquerade as another device?

It might also be useful in dodging malware targeted at your hardware, as well as the phone company picking your pocket.

A fatal flaw

[hessian]

You are depending on the people to vote intelligently.

I agree this is the fatal flaw of democracy.

Most people do not vote intelligently, because they do not act intelligently, and often it has nothing to do with their raw intelligence potential.

Mostly, people are narcissistic, distracted, neurotic, selfish, individualistic, and afloat in a world of desires, judgments, feelings and fears.

They aren't making decisions using their logical abilities, but their emotional reactions.

Dumb Phone

[ArhcAngel]

The Android forums have been discussing this for quite some time. Not sure if it's still possible but one thing that has been working is to call AT&T while your SIM is in a feature phone and requests to have data capabilities blocked. Once they block data to the SIM swap it into your smart phone and talk/text away. They can still see your IMEI so there is a chance they will turn data back on but I haven't seen any indication this is happening.

YMMV

Land of Free (*)

[Moskit]

*) Void where legally prohibited. Other conditions apply. Consult your pharmacist.

Phone plans like Insurance Companies...

[realsilly]

Have you ever read your insurance bill break down of services billed and the amount paid by the insurance company, and then compare it to what you owe as a co-pay? Insurance companies have soooo convoluted the billing practices of doctor's offices that an un-insured patient cannot even pay cash anymore, because the doctor's offices no longer can say what a fair price for service is. (I've heard this from a friend who manages his wife's doctors office)

Data/Phone Plans are just as bad. Today a cell phone provider will sell you a phone at a discounted rate as long as you're locked into some data plan, usually 2 years. When a customer asks about the price of a phone without a data plan, the cost is outrageous. The cheapest of the phones, I'm talking a little flip phone with no keypad and a tiny screen and only digits on the keypad will cost $250.00 without the 2 year plan. I can buy a brand new PC for that and get more out of it than this tiny "piece of shit" phone. So with the 2 year contract, it brings the price down to 1/2 that initial cost. I about threw up when I heard the prices. My original StarTac cost $300 and did more than my POS now. I had to force the phone company to turn off / block internet access on this POS phone. I have internet access, it's at home, it already costs me $35/mo for that? Why would I pay more than that per month for a data plan just to browse the web, from a tiny display? It's sheer craziness.

I'm always amazed at how much people are willing to spend to be active on the web 24/7. I personally feel that cell phone carriers need to split out their products. Pure and true cell phones and data phones; and then offer some reasonable prices for the cell phones that aren't pieces of shit.

At one carrier's store I found only 4 basic flip phone cell phones. All made by the same manufacturer and they all are very poorly made. Cell carriers no longer cater to those of us who don't need or what all that other stuff.

It will be a while, a long while, if ever, that I get myself into a data plan, the cost is just too much.

mod parent up

[CaptainNerdCave]

This is exactly the problem that should be addressed (compulsory contractual services without acceptance).

I'm a Verizon customer (old-school family plan) with a non-smartphone, and I can't change my telephone myself if I try switching to anything that is labeled "smartphone". Frankly, I'm glad, because I wouldn't want to start incurring an additional $15 or $30, and I think a lot of parents would rather not have kids that can change their telephone without their knowledge, only to incur more fees every month.

It has been this way for awhile

[briansco]

I am surprised it took this long for someone to post on this. It happened about 3-4 years ago to me. Took and old Windows phone and replaced a flip. AT&T caught it within a month. Started me on a data plan. The Big 2 do this all the time. It is a little less of a problem with Verizon as their phones have no sim cards to easily change phones. I now use Straight Talk. no contract and my old android phone does what I need. Yes is on the AT&T network but it works find in my house and I don't have to talk to them anymore. Less stress.

Almost

[Murdoch5]

I had an issue like this with Virgin Mobile when I bought my smart phone. They told me that I had to have data and there was no way around it. So I called them back, told them I down graded my phone to a non smart phone and they dropped my data off. They kept calling me and asking if I wanted them to turn it back on and because I kept saying no they weren't allowed to.

Look up cramming

[whitroth]

Then you might want to call the FCC and discuss this; y'know, in spite of everything the Republicans can do, it's still your government, and parts of it still work for *you*.

          mark

Did you read the TOS?

[Vrtigo1]

For some reason people continue to believe that the laws of common sense govern their relationship with commercial 3rd parties. This simply isn't the case. If you read AT&T's TOS for wireless service, you'll see that they state that any "smartphone" requires a data plan. Furthermore, you'll also see that AT&T reserves the right to update their TOS from time to time without providing notice, so if it didn't have the smartphone clause when the OP signed up, they added it and he didn't read the updated version.

As much as I dislike being forced into plans I won't use (i.e. a VOICE plan on a smartphone), AT&T was fully within their rights to make this change but the article is worded as though they did something wrong. Folks, just because you don't like things, does not make them wrong.