Slashdot Mirror
EFF: T-Mobile "Binge On" Is Just Throttling of All Data (eff.org)
onedobb writes: Tests confirm that when Binge On is enabled, T-Mobile throttles all HTML5 video streams to around 1.5Mps, even when the phone is capable of downloading at higher speeds, and regardless of whether or not the video provider enrolled in Binge On. This is the case whether the video is being streamed or being downloaded—which means that T-Mobile is artificially reducing the download speeds of customers with Binge On enabled, even if they're downloading the video to watch later. It also means that videos are being throttled even if they're being watched or downloaded to another device via a tethered connection.
I don't manage carrier networks for a living, but if it's customary for mobile networks to throttle any sort of unlimited usage of their network, there clearly is something behind that. Everyone craps on AT&T for throttling unlimited data customers, but now it appears that TMobile engages in a similar practice with their unlimited video service. Something is happening behind the scenes at these networks on the technical side that's causing them to do this. Can we once and for all stop bitching about throttling?
Having a service where you are cheating customers by not revealing a major part of how a service works is a serious problem. Countries where people are more trusting of other people, corporations and their governments do better economically, and are better by a variety of other metrics (such as Gini coefficient). While there are serious correlation v. causation issues here, it is likely that a big part of this is that people are more willing to engage in transactions with people or institutions they aren't directly familiar with. See e.g. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/20/trust-wealth_n_851519.html, http://www.pewglobal.org/2008/04/15/where-trust-is-high-crime-and-corruption-are-low/, https://agenda.weforum.org/2015/10/how-trusting-are-european-nations/, and http://www.oecd.org/forum/the-cost-of-mistrust.htm. This means that large corporations bilking customers is damaging to all of us at a large scale.
It's obvious to me that they throttle tethers too, as it's listed as a perk for unlimited data users as to why they may want to Binge On (doesn't count against tethered data use, I can hotspot to my chromecast and drop cable).
As for throttling all video, even if it's being charged, that's quite shady IMO.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
If I lived in the US and had this company as my provider, I'd spend the few dollars a month to get a VPN to bypass the slowing down..
Not sure if that is possible for the Apple crowd though.
The majority of Americans believe that Satan is a living, breathing beaing who walks around the place, so... this is way down the list of priorities.
No sig today...
I just assume the other providers are either already doing the same thing or asking R & D to get on it.
"Whaa-aat? We can throttle the data?!
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
After media industry and Apple (media industry's idol, in case you didn't notice), everyone is jumping head-on into this business model.
The fine art is in convincing your gullible (would-be) customers that it is "good for ya". Only Apple has really managed that (if you discount these firms selling really expensive stuff to really rich people: those have been doing that for æons: DeBeer's anyone?). And of course those selling powdered rhino horns for potency and stuff like that.
T-Mobile seems to be failing at that. Why?
I don't get the complaint.
Binge On specifically says that certain providers don't count against your data cap at all, and others will be processed to use less data.
Quoted from http://www.t-mobile.com/offer/... :
So what's the headline here? 'Telco provides exactly the service they claim to provide'?
If they were downgrading video when Binge On was turned OFF, then THAT would be news.
The majority of Americans believe that Satan is a living, breathing beaing who walks around the place, so... this is way down the list of priorities.
Wait...are you saying Mark Zuckerberg isn't real?
I seem to remember that a certain frequent contributor was venting his spleen about this just the other day, but, hey, I guess validation from the EFF is something, right?
I don't recall anyone asking for anything for free.
A big part of the problem here is that many don't offer unlimited data at ANY price, and when you do find someone that does, they often try to bog it down with fine print like this or just flat out cut you off if you use too much of your "unlimited" service.
Now, people don't expect truly "UNLIMITED" data. They can oversell just fine, but the problem is that they're overselling with the thought that a user should only use 0.05% of the actual stated bandwidth that they COULD use. Anyone that dares go above that is "cheating" and abusing the system.
10-15 years ago they could kinda sorta get away with that, but now streaming content is everywhere. People who don't know what bandwidth even is can consume huge chunks of it - completely legally - with Youtube, Hulu, Netflix, Twitch, Sling, Spotify, Pandora, etc.
The telecom companies 10-15 years ago should have realized that those "excessive" users from that era were the future norm and built out their network accordingly. Don't stamp your feet and demand that progress stop.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
T-Mobile uses Content-Type to detect Music.
T-Mobile uses filenames to detect Ookla Speedtest.
TFA says neither filename nor Content-Type is used to detect Video.
If not by header inspection, then how deep does the deep packet inspection go?
Thankfully TFA does mention hash tests confirm content is not modified.
Just let TMO explain that they're optimizing shareholder value. I think that's the expression.
Fiat Lux.
Just that he isn't really "living", "breathing" or "walking" in any conventional sense of the word.
What, what, what, are you yelling for? It is unlimited data. It's just slow.
Don't you mean?
I want unlimited data FAST FAST FAST!
I want it all! I want it all! I want it all! And I WANT IT NOW!!!!!!!!
No matter how you twist it, "unlimited" means unlimited.
If they're not offering a truely unlimited service, they shouldn't be labelling it "unlimited".
The fact that people have come to expect companies lying to them, doesn't make it right.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
The total data rate for all customers combined is limited. This means that throttling the rate for some users will make it faster for everyone else.
It is better for everyone else if video download speed is limited to what is making sense. Let's just hope that they introduced transfer speed control to make sure that everyone gets enough data to watch the videos. People not getting more than they need is just added since it comes for free and helps others.
Nah. I don't either.
You're getting free downloads, and you are upset that they are slow? Turn it off, get them fast and use up your data allotment.
Syfy just did a documentary about a righteous woman who shot Satan in the chest. He should have died but some asshole farmer saved him.
No, because there's also things like data rate caps.
In the landline world, ISPs sell multiple tiers of connection speed. If you want a faster connection you pay more money. Simple.
In the mobile world, this never really caught on, and instead they charge based on link utilization. This results in a metric that makes no sense for customers - most apps don't give an adequate explanation of how much data they use on average and I'm sure, with all the the million analytics suites they apparently need, that they don't want to or outright cannot provide accurate data usage figures for their software. Network speed is comparatively easy to understand, measure, and analyze.
T-Mobile appears to be trying to hack speed tiers back into the mobile pricing model by giving customers the option to reduce bandwidth in favor of it not counting against their link utilization.. which would be fine except for the fact that they will only discount certain video services despite this technology working on all of them for as long as you have it enabled. This appears to be a blatant net neutrality violation, then - the technology clearly works everywhere, why not just let us use it on any qualifying video streaming service?!
http://www.t-mobile.com/cell-p...
For $95 a month T-mobile offers an unlimited high speed data. All of their other plans offer limited high speed data that slows down after you reach the limit.
If you have an unlimited plan and choose to use Binge-On they will give you two free movie rentals.
This move is also unpleasant because it involves the ISP directly fiddling with different types of traffic in order to drive down the expected data use based on customer behavior without being upfront about what they are doing.
If my connection is throttled to 1.5Mb/s because I purchased a "1.5Mb/s Internet!" plan, all well and good. This, however, is a 'zOMG 4G LTE xTreme!'(except for applications you actually want ample bandwidth for; but totally crazy fast for anything you hypothetically might do but don't)' scheme, which is very, very, close to just slapping a fraudulent higher speed label on a lower speed connection.
They do disclose that videos are "up to SD" quality
That stream in 8-Bit due to Binge-On being enabled.
Any throttling or data cap should be clearly specified.
How much "unlimited" data can you transfer if the speed is capped to, say 50 KB/s? For sure you could still browse most websites with this kind of plan, but this is not what you signed up for.
50 KB/s sounds ridiculous? How about 100 KB/s? What is an acceptable limit? The answer is: any, as long as it is clearly stipulated in the contract.
So this is unlimited to you?
Unlimited data even after all your high-speed 4G LTE data is used, at reduced speeds.
Unlimited would be "You can saturate your up- and download bandwidth at the agreed upon transfer rate 24x7x365".
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Waah. I want unlimited data for FREE!!!
Want! WANT!!! WANT!!!!!
That's completely unreasonable. I, on the other hand, simply want what I paid for and which the vendor agreed to deliver. Yes, if the actual agreement included dodge's like "...binge away..." with "...at a max of 1.5 Mbps..." in fine print buried 200 lines into the ToS, it's on me. The problem is that telecom is anything but a free market and I can't force any carrier to do anything with my actions. Therefore, regulation is in order.
Exactly. This is unlimited data
After you hit your data cap, the throttled rate of 128 kb/s is clearly specified. That's 16 KB/s. Unlimited. And it's not ridiculous at all. Slashdot still works fine.
that many don't offer unlimited data at ANY price
Boohoo. Pay for what you use. Do you demand the power company give you unlimited electricity or the hydro company unlimited water? Bandwidth is a finite resource at any given time.
"....reducing the download speeds of customers with Binge On enabled, even if they're downloading the video to watch later."
What? That's outrageous! As everyone knows, downloading and streaming use completely different kinds of bandwidth! ...wait.
I would if I had no way to know how much my consumption was. When I want to reduce my water consumption I shut the valve off. When I want to reduce my power consumption, I shut off appliances. I have no way, on mobile, to shutoff ad networks and pics and tracking and auto played videos and gifs. These are not items that I want. I can not refrain from them. Why should I have to pay for them?
I work in marketing and advertising by turns these days (seems like every career trajectory eventually ends up somewhere in this playground, whether near top or bottom of the food chain), so I have to admit guilt here as well.
There is a tendency to operate with the goal of eliminating negative and limiting language because, surprise surprise, positive language tests out well in actual conversion numbers. But there is unquestionably an element of half-truth in it.
"slowed down and degraded to reduce data use" becomes "optimized for mobile"
"we've raised our prices" becomes "we've changed our plans to offer the best possible value to our customers"
"we've removed a bunch of features that raised costs for us" becomes "we've streamlined our service for ease of use"
"we've slashed our support staff" becomes "we're enabling you to find answers more quickly with our self-help area"
"we've eliminated our warranty" becomes "our product is so reliable that it's made warranties obsolete"
and so on.
It's not the actual policy that's the problem. It's that language is Orwellian. Bad becomes good. "Optimization" is supposed to be a good thing. But in this case, the customer's presumption that "optimized" equals "good for me" is actually not true; the word is being used in opposition to its conventional connotation.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Waah. I want unlimited data for FREE!!!
Want! WANT!!! WANT!!!!!
Maybe not free but when they advertise unlimited data and I pay for unlimited data. I want unlimited fucking data, or at least a high enough limit that unless I'm properly taking the piss I ain't gunna hit.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
that many don't offer unlimited data at ANY price
Boohoo. Pay for what you use. Do you demand the power company give you unlimited electricity or the hydro company unlimited water? Bandwidth is a finite resource at any given time.
First off. I *DO* pay for what I use. On top of a plan for unlimited data, I'm paying special rates simply for having a smartphone that can actually USE that data. Moreover, the plan price just got jacked for ADDITIONAL money, as it's a grandfathered "unlimited" plan that's no longer sold. As such, the unlimited plan is significantly MORE expensive than a metered plan. Stuff like this throttling mean they're overselling and expecting people to use less than one percent of their total possible bandwidth. And anyone who uses more is "cheating". Regardless of how much they pay.
And your analogy is fucked up.
Sure, maybe I can't pull 1.21 jiggawatts, but I run a business out of my home and use roughly 2.5x the power consumed by my neighbors. At no point does the power company sit there and say "between times A and B we're going to limit your power consumption to only what your neighbors, who aren't home and thus not really using much power, consume during the day..."
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I have no way, on mobile, to shutoff ad networks and pics and tracking and auto played videos and gifs.
Why not? What are the reasons for this choice?
Actually, this was explained (some time ago) by Big Bird - Zero is a number.
So if something has 0% trans fat (for example), it can legally contain trans fat (in U.S.A.)
Likewise, something that is unlimited, can legally be limited since they never said infinite...
CAP === 'lookers'
Good grief. Any society depends on cooperation and sharing of resources. You can manufacture outrage that your "unlimited" plan is actually limited, and demand that your carrier provide you with your own dedicated cell tower everywhere, for the "agreed upon price" but that's bullshit. What's more you know that's bullshit.
Of all the carriers, TMobile is about the most generous with bandwidth per dollar, and most reasonable with its terms of use.
Seriously, there are greater abuses out there.
It's not just the "unlimited" portion of the data that is slow though -- stuff that is subject to your monthly cap is also being throttled. Grow up and try reading TFA for a change, or at least TFS.
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
Reduce your browsing? Turn off your phone, just like you turn off your appliances?
What you're saying is that your big expensive light shines in the corners of your house, and you don't use that light so you don't want to pay for it.
It's pretty clearly specified that if you enable Binge On with your account, your data gets throttled.
The only hole seems to be that there are certain cases where having Binge On enabled results in a throttle but not "free" data from the sounds of it.
I have zero problems with this since you, as a user, CAN TURN IT OFF. (TFA indicates that the issue is users who have Binge On enabled causes throttling in cases of providers not part of Binge On.)
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
They advertise that. It costs $95/month and you get what you pay for.
(According to others, you CAN enable "binge on" with that plan, and you get "extra" stuff for doing so. Kind of like how Amazon gives Prime users movie rental credits if they choose "slowboat" shipping instead of the free 2-day)
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
^But you are not paying a flat fee for unlimited power. You are paying by the KWH. So the analogy would be paying the ISP by the MB, not flat fee usage.
But there have been instances where user consumption has been limited due to power supply constraints. Brownouts are an example. Load control devices another.
We really REALLY need to enact some laws against false advertising.
What does that have to do with wrestling?
that many don't offer unlimited data at ANY price
Boohoo. Pay for what you use. Do you demand the power company give you unlimited electricity or the hydro company unlimited water? Bandwidth is a finite resource at any given time.
This is like saying stop complaining about the electric company dropping a phase going into your building because you're using too much electricity.
This is why I've always preferred the term "unmetered" to "unlimited", where the notion of unmetered does not necessarily mean no records of usage are kept at all (although it may, and certainly that it what the term might literally imply), but that any records which *MIGHT* be kept are not generally used to change any aspect of the terms of service for the customer, so that the end result for the consumer for the most part is as if their usage were literally unmetered.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
... And it costs me nothing to stream it to my phone. I don't care how they do it. It works great.
Move on to the next 'outrage'.
I typically rack up about 50GB/month on t-mo. I opted out of binge so I get full hd across the board.
I get unlimited data, a flagship phone, insurance, 5 GB hotspot, upgrade every 6 months to a new phone for $50 and after taxes and fees my bill is like $87 bucks a month.
If do I think it should be opt in or out via a text message or something and t-mo could do better here but ultimately for people on a strict budget this is probably a win for them. For those who it's not, it's a mild nuisance to go log onto the website and opt out. Also, you can opt in and out as much as you want so you could binge watch Making a Murderer on your phone and then opt out and start watching video in HD against your 2 or 5 or 10GB cap.. then opt back in and binge watch Jessica Jones.
Except the content keeps streaming just fine... For as long as you want. It's unlimited streaming, not unlimited bandwidth.
It's not just the "unlimited" portion of the data that is slow though -- stuff that is subject to your monthly cap is also being throttled. Grow up and try reading TFA for a change, or at least TFS.
I did read TFA.
Look at the bar graph. Streaming a video, downloading a video file to the SD card, and downloading a video file with the headers changed to say it was not a video file were all throttled, and all got speed of 1.5Mbps. Downloading a large non-video file for comparison had a speed of 4.2 Mbps.
That 4.2 is slightly lower than the 5.5 achieved without "binge on" feature enabled... but if you look at the error bars, the difference doesn't indicate throttling; it's just normal variance (i.e., within margin of error).
That variance is interesting. Binge on has almost no variance in download speed, but "normal" has 50% (or for one test, even more) variation in speed (look at the error bars-- very tight with binge on; very large with "normal").
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Grow up? What are you, 12?
The majority of Americans believe that Satan is a living, breathing being who walks around the place, so... this is way down the list of priorities.
Wait...are you saying Mark Zuckerberg isn't real?
MZ does not exist. However, MZ exists.
T-Mobile customer, not much choice considering their lower rates. TorGuard VPN app on my LG G4, no throttling here. Fuck them.
"Bandwidth is a finite resource at any given time"
Somebody failed basic physics. In theory, the EM range is infinite.
There is nothing stopping you from using an ad blocker. There are third party browsers for Android and iOS 9 supports Ad-blocking extensions natively.
Just more marketing lies.
Even if you get LTE speeds all the time, you are still limited. You can argue that your hitting a technological, rather than a business, limitation, but it's still a limit.
In theory, theory and practice are the same... in practice, you're a fucked-up useless idiot.
Somebody is being deliberately obtuse.
BingeOn doesn't use your data plan, it's unlimited, and you complain that it's limited to 1.5 Mbps? That seems like a good deal to me. But if you don't like it, you can opt out: nobody is forcing you to use it.
If they advertise d and offered a unlimited plan for x/month then, yes I would expect it
Unlimited has never meant unlimited. The only time it did was back in dial-up days, and even then "unlimited" was limited to the number of phone lines you paid for. Every unlimited is limited.
Thus the word has come to take a meaning closer to "not limited per user" or something like that. They shouldn't place user limits on "unlimited" but are free to oversubscribe so that not everyone could get 100% all the time. Done right, anyone who tries will get 100% of their service whenever they try.
Learn to love Alaska
Unlimited would be "You can saturate your up- and download bandwidth at the agreed upon transfer rate 24x7x365".
Nobody has ever had that definition of "unlimited" for a consumer service. That you would like dedicated service for a consumer price doesn't change reality.
Learn to love Alaska
I have metered power. I don't expect the power company to be trying to identify which electrons are going to my water heater or refrigerator and blocking those, while letting my TV electrons through, so long as they are going to an approved TV channel.
And I've had unmetered water and unmetered power. Note the other utilities never sell them as "unlimited" just "unmetered". And yes, they do sell them that way, in some places and circumstances.
Learn to love Alaska
I'm fine with technological limitations. But what about those "business limitations"?
Wasn't the whole concept of the "free market" based on supply and demand? If a person has a demand to get all technical available LTE speeds 24/7 shouldn't there be some business jumping at the chance of offering it? Otherwise isn't it just like in the former eastern block economies when there was a shipment of oranges into town you had to queue up at five in the morning so that the four oranges per person could be distributed throughout the day?
I somewhat get the feeling that having an economy that is steered by "the shareholders" instead of "the party" is just as bad in the long run.
The thing is, at least to me, that there are two different aspects of a net connection that 'unlimited' can target.
One is speed. Obviously physics prevent such a thing as an unlimited speed, but it could be taken to mean that no matter how much you're trying to download, it will come through as fast as the server on the other end is pushing it.
The second is total data transfer. Download 100 GB in a month? Fine, do so with nothing extra appearing on your bill or your speed dropping from overuse. 200 GB? 15 TB? Go right ahead, it's unlimited!
It seems to me that they are going kinda for the second - download as much video content as you will, BUT it will be at this speed. Not really unlimited, but marketing is about buzzwords, not page-long descriptions about what it is they're selling. That's for you to look at before you put your signature on the paper.
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
Then you must want that word banned, because nothing is unlimited.
I thought it was known that "unlimited" only meant "more than we expect you to reasonably use".
Now, people don't expect truly "UNLIMITED" data.
I do. If you sell me unlimited data it had better be unlimited, not "Unlimited (tm)", In the same way I'd expect that if I purchased airfare from LAX to ATL, you wouldn't dump me off in DFW and call it squaresies. If you take 100% of my money, you had damn well better deliver 100% of what you sold me. If you didn't really mean unlimited, find someone with a more comprehensive vocabulary that can more accurately describe the product you're actually selling.
But that would be sensible, easy, and honest.
It will never happen.
bickerdyke
You really shouldn't speak for the majority of any group of people when you have no idea of what you speak of.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
My unlimited with Tmobile is certainly more unlimited with AT&T in days gone by. My monthly average is 60GB of mobile & I usually come close to the 5GB of teathered data (usually for remote desktop needs). AT&T I'd end up with all manner of messages as I crested 20GB on their "unlimited". I always laugh at the commercials however about $30 for X amount of of data.
Bandwidth is a finite resource at any given time.
Good point. Veery good point.
So, for the sake of the argument, assume it is also correct. Then, HOW ON EARTH can Telcos be selling effing UNLIMITED bandwidth?
Right. They can't. Exactly how the power company can't sell endless electricity. But do other utility companies advertide anything unlimited? No.
Boohoo. Pay for what you use. Do you demand the power company give you unlimited electricity or the hydro company unlimited water?
See, THAT's the difference.
bickerdyke
What crack are you smoking, and where does someone get some?
So if something has 0% trans fat (for example), it can legally contain trans fat (in U.S.A.)
No, 0% means 0%, not 0.1%.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Except the content keeps streaming just fine... For as long as you want. It's unlimited streaming, not unlimited bandwidth.
What good is unlimited streaming if the quality isn't that great? I've never used their service so I have no idea what it's like.
Honestly, who cares? 1.5mpbs for free streaming video is a long way away from what other providers provide. If the quality is knocked a bit and keeps me from paying up to $15 a gig of data, I'm fine with that. Besides, with 10gig of data per line versus the competitors 4 gigs shared across all the lines, T-mobile is doing just fine. I'm good with SD quality on my ipad. ... for free.
Select from tblFriends where interesting >= 4;
Kind of like how Amazon gives Prime users movie rental credits if they choose "slowboat" shipping instead of the free 2-day
Thank you for informing me of this, I will have to take advantage of it. Most of my orders aren't a high priority to me, I could get lots of free rentals this way.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Unlimited doesn't mean you can go as fast as the connection can support. If I purchased an unlimited 1.5/1.5 MB connection then I expect to be able to upload and download at a rate of 1.5 MB 24x7 as long as my computer and the server can handle it. Anything else is fraud. If there is a monthly data cap that's hit when using 1.5/1.5 24x7 before the month is up then the ISP has committed fraud pure and simple.
If you sell it as such, I am expecting to get it as such. If you cannot provide it, don't sell it.
You would be fully justified in your outcry if they sold it as a limited data plan and the customer now unreasonably expects it to be unlimited.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Meanwhile, any first tier university has 40 Gbps campuswide and 100 Gbps ports too.
Yes, 100,000 Mbps.
Suckers!
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
The quality is good.. no stuttering, no pixellation. I guess if you're a cinephile you might find a problem with it, but then you probably wouldn't be watching on your phone.
Not really.
When you mean to say "more than we expect you to reasonably use", you say "more than we expect you to reasonably use".
If you're not in a situation where something is unlimited, practical or theoretical, you simply use a different word.
(As a side note, "more than we expect you to reasonably use" is subjective to the point of being useless).
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
I guess if you're a cinephile you might find a problem with it, but then you probably wouldn't be watching on your phone.
True
0% can mean 0.5% on a nutrition label
Your reading comprehension needs some work. T-mobile has two different "unlimited" data options, one which is unlimited 2g with an allotment of (limited) 4g LTE bandwidth, and one that is unlimited 4g LTE. What you've quoted refers to the former, while for $95 you get the latter (along with unlimited talk and text).
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Sounds like you should leave AT&T.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
The free market doesn't apply to mobile carriers because the supply is limited to available radio bandwidth which must be tightly regulated by some authority in order to keep it free from interference.
They can't favour different providers with their throttling, so they need to do it indiscriminately.
That's a production problem, not a delivery problem. With bandwidth, production is ENTIRELY the job of the other end of the connection. For cell companies, they have one job -- delivery. Comparing rate limitations to power limitations during brownouts is NOT apples to apples.
It's actually impossible to offer unlimited data. This would require infinite bandwidth.
A restaurant can offer "all-you-can-eat", but they probably can't offer "unlimited food", because food is a limited resource.
As far as I can tell, "unlimited data" in the world of cellular means that they will never cut your data off or charge you more money for going over a certain amount of data. There will always be a limit to your bandwidth whether artificial or from physics.
People just need to get used to the idea that datarate is as important a spec as gigabytes when getting a data plan.
It's easy to offer "unlimited" data plans if the data rate is low enough.
I rather like the idea of being able to throttle my connection to have it not count toward my data cap. It would be nice if I could actually decide when this happens, rather than having T-Mobile decide.
So, there's this interesting phenomenon.
It's well known that big companies employ PR firms to go out and run damage control when negative news stories break (even if that damage control is just a bunch of people derailing the discussion by acting like complete asshats), but you can't actually accuse an individual of being a "shill" without someone calling you a conspiracy theorist. And in all fairness, there's probably a fair amount of crossover between corporate shills and people who really are just trolling.
While this comment may or may not actually be from a paid shill, I think it's pretty safe to say that it's the kind of thing that a paid shill would post.
Why yes, there are! And if they happened all day every day, are you going to be happy if you complain about it and someone says "boohoo!" at you or are you going to flip your shit? Because personally, I'd flip my shit and make it my life goal to hunt down the person that said that and short out his mains power just after the meter. "Boohoo! Pay for what you use!"
Unlimited 4G LTE customers who use more than 23 GB of data in a bill cycle will have their data usage de-prioritized compared to other customers for that bill cycle at locations and times when competing network demands occur, resulting in relatively slower speeds. See t-mobile.com/OpenInternet for details.
oops.
That's not limiting, though... oops.
You see, when a pipe is only so big, only so much can fit through it. It would sure seem to make sense to let someone who hasn't had a chance at the tap yet get on in there and have a drink before someone who's had a few glasses already, no? That's not saying "no, you can't have more" or "you have to slow down", that's saying "let someone else have a go at it first" and that's certainly not limiting, it's just life. Unless you're an egotistical dick who thinks you should have everything and everyone else can just live off your scraps, in which case I think Verizon has a plan for you.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
They advertise that. It costs $95/month and you get what you pay for.
not really.
Unlimited 4G LTE customers who use more than 23 GB of data in a bill cycle will have their data usage de-prioritized compared to other customers for that bill cycle at locations and times when competing network demands occur, resulting in relatively slower speeds. See t-mobile.com/OpenInternet for details.
What crack are you smoking, and where does someone get some?
So if something has 0% trans fat (for example), it can legally contain trans fat (in U.S.A.)
No, 0% means 0%, not 0.1%.
What crack are you smoking, and where does someone get some?
So if something has 0% trans fat (for example), it can legally contain trans fat (in U.S.A.)
No, 0% means 0%, not 0.1%.
Well, when it comes to nutrition labels, 0% means anything under 0.5%, because they can round off to the nearest percent: When the Nutrition Facts label says a food contains “0 g” of trans fat, but includes “partially hydrogenated oil” in the ingredient list, it means the food contains trans fat, but less than 0.5 grams of trans fat per serving. So, if you eat more than one serving, you could quickly reach your daily limit of trans fat. (American Heart Assoc.)
assumptions at work.
"Here. I've optimized your car for you."
By social convention, people will assume this means that you have made their car run better. No, this is not spoken, but it is based on tacit agreement, a kind of social contract. We don't have to specify every last thing in detail; we can all agree that we know what we mean.
However, you could—certainly—mean that you have optimized their car for them to be more optimal with respect to environmental concerns. For example, you may have removed the engine. This would result in a perfectly optimal configuration for minimizing emissions and fossil fuel consumption.
But it would rightfully not be what someone expects when you said, "I've optimized your car for you." That would be a violation of the implicit social contract and social expectations.
But of course that is exactly the point of this story, and exactly where we are today. Which is why we *do* specify every last thing in detail (in interminable EULAs) and also why people feel as though the social contract is breaking down: because it is. But there are still remnants enough of it in place that people get upset when they feel as though it's been violated, and I can't say that I blame them.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
If that is indeed true and not just a gross oversimplification resulting in a misunderstanding of the legal system then you should be able to set about filing quite a lot of lawsuits.
That is true as well. But Cell companies have to manage capacity in order to deliver. Its fundamentally different in how the need to go about it just because of the nature of the product.
Technically speaking, anything that requires finite resources to operate cannot be "unlimited". Also, "unlimited, within reason" works quite well. You can't eat all the food at a buffet either. People like pooling in together to receive a group benefit. If one person starts making extra demands then obviously there is not going to be agreement among the parties and the deal is off.
Reading quickly through this thread, with all the comments about whiners wanting something for nothing, it seems to me that most are missing the real story here. The Binge-on plan is supposed to be about getting certain content without it counting against a data cap, that certain providers have worked out a deal with T-Mobile, allowing their streams to be “optimized” in exchange for users getting unlimited access. But it turns out that everyone‘s content is being treated the same: it’s all throttled. So what exactly is the point of having only some content providers participate? A select few companies have allowed their names to be used, and have theoretically signed on to the scheme, but those providers' data isn’t being treated any differently then anyone else’s, the data is ALL being throttled! Think about it, all video data on the internet is being treated the same, but only some companies are being given the opportunity to serve up unlimited amounts of video. Why? Why just them? I have read that other streaming providers can opt in for free, which if true just makes the unequal treatment worse. By default, T-Mobile is treating video data as if the provider has already agreed to the plan, but only a select few companies are reaping the benefits. From an engineering standpoint, participating companies are doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING differently than non-participating companies. WTF? Bottom line: ALL VIDEO CONTENT IS BEING THROTTLED, SO ALL VIDEO CONTENT PROVIDERS SHOULD REAP THE BENEFITS! Anything else is a flat out violation of net neutrality. And that’s the real story here.
Well if the city signs a capacity agreement ( http://ok-sallisaw2.civicplus.... PDF WARNING!! )
I bet they expect unlimited usage for the speed they paid for.
Just like I expect to be able to use my connection as much as I like when my isp says unlimited.
I suppose I could pay 7.78/MB Like the city does and have a dedicated line Just $77.80 for a 10/10 connection.... That's not a lot higher than what the city charges for $55 for 10/10. But why? All three isp's in town have absolutely no usage limits for business.
Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
If your provider is doing HTML5 over HTTPS, T-Mobile will never know the content.
Unless, of course, they've bundled some certs with your phone and MITM all your traffic, in which case you have a much, much bigger problem.
You can pretty much bet your ass that if you were causing your neighbors to brown out then the power company would, indeed, come knocking at your door.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Boohoo! I've given directions to both my house in Maine and the place that I'm at right now - in Florida. Not that I have a dog in this fight but I suspect you don't have the balls to do shit. Internet Tough Guy syndrome is silly and you're not fooling anyone except maybe yourself. Let's be adults here and not pretend that you have the courage to do anything of the sort.
Hell, there are enough descriptions in my posts that I'll even narrow it down for you. Find the NYE thread and find where I invited Slashdot to come blow stuff up with me. A few people actually came. It was pretty fun. Not one of them shorted out my house, pissed in my plant pots, killed my dog, molested my girlfriend, or even shouted a bunch of obscenities. Hell, not one word about cows, GNAA, Yoda in the ass, first post, or large black cocks was even spoken. At least not that I noticed.
If you want, later on this spring, I may even be out in Henderson, NV. If that's closer then I'll give you directions there. I still don't think you've got the berries to do anything more than run your mouth on Slashdot. Or maybe send me pizza. That's fine, the last time I went through that I found I actually like this stuff called "Hawaiian Pizza." Seriously, good stuff. It has pineapple and ham. Whodathunkit?
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Heh... Wait until they force a rollout of the smart grid and smart appliances. :/
That said, I've never seen "unlimited" advertised. I have seen "unlimited*" advertised lots of times. That asterisk is important and usually means that there are, in fact, limits and it's up to you to decide if you want to pay them or not. Of course, that means you have to read the little tiny print and that can take a while. I have, in fact, sat there and read that tiny print. In hindsight, that was probably because I'm an ass but, in my defense, if they're gonna have tiny print then it may take me a while to read and understand it before I agree to sign something.
Yes, I read slower (I might even mouth out the words) the more frequently they tell me that it is not important. I've even been known to cross a line or two out and initial it before signing. No, I will not absolve you of all fiduciary responsibility. None of that has gone to court yet but the person behind the counter usually looks a little flustered and just takes it by that point.
The benefits of being a crotchety old man are few but that's one of 'em. Another is you get to hit on the women from ages 18 to 80. You're an old creeper anyhow, you might as well make the most of it.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
They don't sell unlimited. I bet you've never, ever, seen "Unlimited" in your country.
It's "Unlimited*."
As I mentioned above, that asterisk is important. I'm not saying it's right, but that is how it is.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Then sell it as such. I'm fairly sure people would still buy your plan if you sold it as something that is for all practical purposes "unlimited" while actually having a limit that is irrelevant for 90% of the people out there.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
OOh.... that's very interesting. If I hadn't posted already, I'd mod you up.
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
There usually isn't an agreed-upon transfer rate for residential service. The agreement typically says you will get up to X Mb/s, and if it never approaches that you might have a legitimate complaint. It is often possible to get an agreement for guaranteed X Mb/s, but that's probably going to be a business account, and it's going to be much more expensive. Read the agreement.
Unlimited at a restricted rate means that you can saturate your link at the slower speed 24x7x365, and the ISP doesn't have a legitimate complaint.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Mobile data connections have definite technological limits, but you can ask about guaranteed connection speeds. On a land-line connection, it'll just be lots more expensive than the usual consumer connection. For mobile data, if you can get it, it's likely to be a lot more expensive than that. You'll usually be dealing with the ISP's business sales division, but I doubt they'd turn down extra money from an individual.
You seem to be expecting reliable business-class service with an SLA on a consumer account price, and you're not going to get it.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
In case you're actually saying that seriously, yes, the EM range is infinite. Only part of it is useful. You can't use wavelengths that are too long because you can't get an efficient antenna that you can carry (the Navy uses long wavelengths to talk to submerged subs, which can have big antennae), and the data transmission rate will suck. You can't use wavelengths that are too short because they don't penetrate or go around obstacles. Imagine needing a visual connection to your cell tower to use the phone.
So, there's a limited band of frequencies useful for any sort of data transmission, and there's lots of uses for it. Cellular data can use only a portion of it. It can't just stay on one frequency, because a transmission that uses one frequency and only one can't convey information. It needs a nonzero frequency range, and therefore there's only room for so many frequency bands in any area of the EM spectrum. Also, receivers aren't perfect in picking up one frequency and disregarding all others, so even if we wanted to transmit an unvarying signal it would use a nonzero portion of the spectrum.
Then there's error rate. You don't want your phone blasting away with lots of volume on a frequency, because it'll drain the batteries fast and likely make the phone hot. This means we're using low-volume signals, and there is a significant amount of error in the channel. Shannon's Theorem specifies the maximum data transmission rate depending on signal-to-noise ratio and bandwidth.
tl;dr: There's a limited amount of data transmission that can be done using the EM spectrum, and there's lots and lots of people who want to use it. The only way a cellular carrier can increase the data transmission is to build towers closer together, and that gets expensive real fast.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Read the agreement. What I've seen without RTFA is "unlimited at a lower rate". If that's what they offer, then that's what you can legitimately expect. If you want a higher guaranteed data rate, ask about such plans. They'll be a LOT more expensive if they exist.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Any society depends on cooperation and sharing of resources. You can manufacture outrage that your "unlimited" plan is actually limited ...
I expect to get what I pay for, and what a company advertises. No more, no less. I'm no precious snowflake demanding "my own cell tower", I just want to be able to use what I pay for. If I pay for "Unlimited" anything, I do not expect to be cut off after X hours of high usage. It isn't my problem that internet providers have over-provisioned and over-promised to the point of absurdity. Promise less and deliver on that promise - that's all I ask.
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Do you speak English? Words have meanings and just because some marketing droid decides to deceive you by bending a definition to the point of absurdity doesn't make it right or legal.
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
"Unlimited" means "WITHOUT LIMIT". They chose to use that word, not me. If they're going to say they offer unlimited, they darned well better, or get sued for fraud. Call it anything else you want - 'higher priority data rates", "premier service", etc but don't mangle definitions of words that are absolutes.
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Except that it's not a limit! It's network management, so that the network remains usable, and only takes effect when there is congestion. Perhaps your view of network management practices has been tainted by the likes of AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and pretty much every other major data provider (wireline or mobile, doesn't really matter) throttling "heavy" users at all times, regardless of congestion, but the honest facts here are that T-Mobile is not doing this. Binge-on would be the exception, except that they openly state what the limits for that particular class of service are, so they're not offering anything unlimited in that respect; and if you do want unlimited still, you turn Binge-on off and you get it.
Also, I don't know what everyone is talking about with this 5mbps cap bullshit on T-Mobile. I'm sitting at around 54GB used this billing cycle and have speeds ranging from 15Mbps to 50Mbps depending on signal strength and tower utilization.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
I think people care when it also limits the videos that aren't included in the free binge-on streaming. They should also be honest about what they are doing, if they were then this would be a non-story.
Consumer services are different from business services. What you want is business service, and to get it, you will have to pay more. Because you are asking for more. There is a reason the unlimited gym membership costs $X a month, and rent costs 10x more. The gym doesn't expect you to live there. If you tried to live there, they would terminate the contract.
Look, all market-speak aside, here's what I'd expect from something called unlimited. I pay for 5 mbps download rate, let's say. I would expect 'unlimited' access to that to mean I could download at 5mbps 24x7x365. Anything else is not unlimited in my book. I was involved early on with Async Transfer Mode comms, where you'd get the agreed-upon data rate and QoS guarantees on your VC or nothing. That's what I'd like to see - guaranteed transfer rates that are actually usable 24x7.
If you want to sell me 'Up to 500 mbps as network congestion allows', by all means please do, but do NOT call it unlimited.
What you're calling 'network management' I call oversubscribing and under-engineering.
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
N/T
Except this bit of text to bypass the lameness filter.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Technically they were honest. They said that the video feeds were "optimized for viewing on mobile devices". Mobile devices usually have much smaller displays than systems at home, and likewise people are accustomed to slower connections on their mobile devices (LTE isn't THAT old after all). So by throttling back the speed, you force services (like Netflix, Youtube, etc) which automatically downshift into lighter bandwidth feeds to switch to an "optimized" feed. Makes perfect sense. Sneaky? I didn't read it that way. But hey, some folks want 4K video on their iphone while sitting on the subway. To each his own.
Select from tblFriends where interesting >= 4;
i see you aren't able to parse that statement from t-mobile. let me try to dumb it down for you. they say that if you go above some consumption level under your "unlimited" data plan, they will throttle your throughput.
yes, i realize the pipe is only so big. so if there was a 1Mbps pipe and 2 people, they'd each get 0.5Mbps. but that's not what t-mo is saying. they are saying that one person will get 0.8Mbps, and the other heavy data consumer will get 0.2Mbps. that's throttling.
i didn't make any claim about whether this is good, bad, necessary, or otherwise. but the few folks here crowing about their unlimited t-mo plans should understand what it means.
Unless you're an egotistical dick who thinks you should have everything and everyone else can just live off your scraps
who told you? damn.
Except that T-Mobile doesn't sell a committed speed, they sell access to whatever bandwidth is available and not in use by other subscribers. Meanwhile, what you describe is a limit of 5Mbps.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
They aren't throttling, though. Hell, it's not even a subtle difference! Throttling means slowing transmission to a predetermined rate; what they're doing here is reducing priority (internally, they actually use QoS tagging to deprioritize this traffic) while still allowing access to as much of the pipe as is available. That's why I'm sitting at nearly 60GB used this billing cycle and just downloaded a file at 22.96mbps over LTE.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Throttling means slowing transmission to a predetermined rate
you have to be kidding me. so it's not throttling, because they are reducing the speed at a dynamic rate? please.
They're not reducing the speed, though; they are delaying packets when another user who has not been deprioritized attempts to use the last available bit of the pipe, but that doesn't necessarily slow down the connection over the course of a second. This is especially true given that the tower has much more bandwidth available than a single phone can use. So, in that frame, your packets might be held back but they'll go out in the next, along with any new packets you've sent to the tower in that time. Let me clarify that 23-24Mbps is about average for me, sitting on my couch, in my home, with my phone, regardless of how much data I've used during my billing cycle; sometimes I see as low as 15mbps, sometimes 50Mbps or more, very rarely it'll dip down to 10Mbps if there are a lot of people downloading crap on their phones at that moment. Depending on where I happen to be, that average speed can be higher or lower; one place I frequent, i see speeds ranging from 40-60Mbps consistently, even when I've used several dozen GB so far in my billing cycle.
Where's the throttling? Where's the limiting? I'm simply not seeing it in practice, so why are we talking about theory?
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
They're not reducing the speed, though; they are delaying packets when another user who has not been deprioritized attempts to use the last available bit of the pipe
there's the throttling. that's like like saying my average commute speed wasn't reduced, i was just delayed in getting to work.
Where's the throttling? Where's the limiting? I'm simply not seeing it in practice, so why are we talking about theory?
i think the statement said they reserved the right to do such such throttling, not that they absolutely do it.
that's like like saying my average commute speed wasn't reduced, i was just delayed in getting to work.
No, that's like saying "I got stopped at a red light but still got to work just as fast"
i think the statement said they reserved the right to do such such throttling, not that they absolutely do it.
Okay, so you're complaining about something they reserve the right to do, eventually, at some point in the future, but are not doing yet? You know, with any other provider I'd be right there alongside you, but this is T-Mobile we're talking about and they've backpedaled on every single "we reserve the right" network management measure they've announced since Simple Choice became available.
That said, how would you propose they manage bandwidth over the airwaves? They've already got way more bandwidth to each tower, via fiber, than is available over the air, where that bandwidth is available to them (e.g. obviously they don't in areas where there is no provider with infrastructure to deliver it; what to do about that is another question altogether), so widening the pipe coming from the tower isn't a viable option. I mean, sure, they could do it, but, really, there would be zero benefit to it; they'd just need larger buffers to avoid dropping packets that don't fit in the finite amount of wireless bandwidth available. Certainly you're not proposing that they add more airspace?
You see, every device that connects to a given tower reduces the amount of available bandwidth on that tower. So, why not just add more towers, then? I know that's your next question, or what you'd suggest they do, so let me answer that. Every device that connects to a tower within range of a given tower creates interference, which reduces effective bandwidth even further (by way of causing retransmits and requiring checksumming schemes with even higher payload overhead), so that's really not an option either. And it is not the users' packets which are being delayed, as T-Mobile will pass those along as quickly as they are received; it is packets coming in the other direction, from the fatter pipe to the tower, then over the airwaves to the user, which are potentially being delayed. That is, download, not upload. Given that, personally, I hope they don't backpedal on this, as it would mean utilizing no network management whatsoever, and a lot of dropped packets requiring retransmits over the longer (e.g. slower round-trip) link, and an overall worse experience.
Now that I know where your head is, might I suggest some toilet paper and an air freshener?
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Okay, so you're complaining about something they reserve the right to do, eventually, at some point in the future, but are not doing yet?
i'm not complaining about anything, i'm merely pointing it out.
Congratulations. You've now demonstrated why every carrier was guilty of engaging in an unfair and deceptive trade practice.
If it's impossible, don't advertise that you're doing it.
It's not just carriers. It's any vendor of any product or service offering unlimited anything.
Do you speak English? It's descriptive, not prescriptive, thus the use of the word defines the definition, not what you think others should use the word to mean.
Learn to love Alaska