Slashdot Mirror


AT&T Is Boosting Data Plans, Dropping Overage Fees (reuters.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: ATT Inc, the No. 2 U.S wireless provider, said on Wednesday that it would roll out a new data plan that does away with overage fees and reduces data speeds for wireless customers who surpass their data allowance. Beginning Sunday, customers can choose the new Mobile Share Advantage plan and pay for extra data, if needed, or work with slower data speeds instead of paying for overages, the company said in a statement. Its current plan includes a $5 data overage charge per 300 megabytes on its 300-megabyte plan and $15 per 1 gigabyte on other plans. ATT has also revised prices and data bucket sizes. For instance, its larger 25-gigabyte plan now costs $190 per month for four smartphone lines. It previously cost $235. All the new plans include an access charge of $10 to $40 per month for each device, ATT said. The new plans will continue to have features such as unlimited text and talk and rollover data. Plans above 10 gigabytes also include unlimited talk and text to Mexico and Canada and no roaming charges in Mexico. Last month, Verizon introduced a new "Safety Mode" for its data plans that similarly throttles customers who exceed their monthly allotment to avoid overages. While Verizon charges customers on lower tier plans for the feature, ATT notes that it does not apply any extra charges.

71 comments

  1. Overages? by TWX · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And here I am, having been an unlimited-everything T-Mobile customer for the better part of a decade...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:Overages? by npslider · · Score: 1

      If I could get T-Mobile in Alaska... I would. Sigh.......

    2. Re:Overages? by dj245 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And here I am, having been an unlimited-everything T-Mobile customer for the better part of a decade...

      Several of the MVNO's using AT&T's own network have offered "unlimited" (usually capped 4G + unlimited 3G) for several years. Their network could obviously support the traffic. The only reason AT&T didn't until now was because they could get away with it. I guess the competition finally forced their hand.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    3. Re:Overages? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the network cannot support everyone using hundreds of gigabytes of data per month. Just because it was offered to a small group and not used doesn't mean the network can handle it rolled out to the larger group.

    4. Re: Overages? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've heard the same thing said about Verizon's network. If they can't handle the load, how is it reasonable to zero rate go90, which is owned by Verizon? From the standpoint of a cell phone tower, 100 GB of go90 data has the same impact as 100 GB of Netflix. If network congestion is really such an issue, how is it that carriers can afford to zero rate some data, including streaming video?

    5. Re:Overages? by FrankHaynes · · Score: 3, Insightful

      T-Mobile is good for you.

      Until you leave the city or the interstate highway.

      --
      slashdot: A failed experiment.
    6. Re:Overages? by scatbomb · · Score: 1

      Hence for the vast majority of people who live near a freeway or city it's perfect. Judging by the costs in this summary my plan is saving me over $1000/year compared to ATT (I'm on MetroPCS), and my phone works just fine thank you very much.

    7. Re:Overages? by Wild_dog! · · Score: 1

      I had Tmobile for about 12 years. It was great and my wife's verizon would conk out all of the time while we were traveling. I even seemed to get reception where nobody else did.

      Alas we moved to an area where TMobile works, but didn't have a presence so I couldn't seem to figure out how to get my messages.
      Now we are on AT&T. Works well and have a cheap group plan for about 32 bucks a line with data currently... soon to be less.

      I suppose now that they are dropping further we will have to figure out how to lower everyones bill to our advantage again.

      Gotta love competition.

    8. Re:Overages? by Wild_dog! · · Score: 1

      My wife and I dropped our 160/month and now pay roughly 64/month on a group plan with a bunch of family and friends. We take half of the savings and put it away for new phones/phone repair etc. The other 1/2 goes into monthly savings account.
      Works well for us and we save about 1100 or so each year. Works very well for us and it seems like it is fairly inexpensive for what we do.
      Glad ATT is dropping rates... now maybe we can say a bit more.

    9. Re:Overages? by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      Yeah I always hear that from verizon customers, especially when they say "it doesn't work over in bumblefuck nowhere" and I'm like "well, I don't ever go there so I'd rather just pay less than half of what you're paying and have it work everywhere I intend on being." That, and where I work I seem to get a better signal than anybody on AT&T or Verizon (and Sprint users get shit slow service no matter where they are.)

    10. Re:Overages? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They've massively upgraded their network over the last few years. There's still large areas that are completely uncovered, but they've got most of the major highways covered.
      https://explore.t-mobile.com/4G-lte-network

    11. Re:Overages? by TWX · · Score: 1

      Only place I've ever had a problem with it, the other drivers with broken vehicles at the same place also had problems. We all hit some debris and punctured tires. No one had cell service and there were other companies represented.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  2. I stopped using AT&T a long time ago.. HINT: F by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember the little closet where they wiretapped everybody in San Francisco, CA, USA? Of course you do this is FBI Slashdot.

  3. The bottom line by Dorianny · · Score: 1

    Where the industry is going seems rather obvious. Take away Unlimited as well as NO-data plan and have everyone pay for a Mediocre data caps that ensure demanding streaming services can't be sued. That would force them to spend money upgrading their networks

    1. Re: The bottom line by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not quite, and what's going on here is actually pretty insidious.

      Verizon has attempted to launch their own streaming video service called go90. They want to be a competitor to other streaming video services. They also want to force everyone onto metered data plans that charge very expensive overages. However, go90 is zero rated. There's also what's called FreeBee data, in which businesses can pay for their content to be zero rated.

      One of these is a pretty clear antitrust violation. Verizon is using their position as a carrier to gain an advantage with go90 over other streaming video services. The other is very close to paid prioritization.

      Whether content is zero rated or not doesn't change the actual amount of bandwidth consumed. Watching 100 GB of Netflix uses the same amount of wireless bandwidth as 100 GB of go90. If network congestion was really as severe as it's made out to be, carriers couldn't afford to zero rate any content that is a large amount of data.

    2. Re: The bottom line by unrtst · · Score: 1

      Do any of the carriers (or MVNO's, but I'd rather it be the actual carrier) formally allow you to bring your own android device and put it on a plan with no data (just talk and text)?

    3. Re: The bottom line by segin · · Score: 1

      T-Mobile has a $25/mo talk-and-text-only plan. They don't give two shits what kind of device you put the SIM in.

  4. Can we say... MODEM speed? by npslider · · Score: 2

    "...all data usage will be reduced to a maximum of 128 kbps for the rest of their bill cycle."

    Does it also make the sound of an analog modem establishing a connection every time you send or receive data?

    I think I'd rather pay the overage fee...

    1. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by GerbilSoft · · Score: 2

      What kind of analog dialup modem were you using that could hit 128 Kbps?

    2. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by geek · · Score: 2

      "...all data usage will be reduced to a maximum of 128 kbps for the rest of their bill cycle."

      Does it also make the sound of an analog modem establishing a connection every time you send or receive data?

      I think I'd rather pay the overage fee...

      128k was ISDN speed. 56k was modem.

    3. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by Calydor · · Score: 1

      In Germany it gets throttled to 64 kbps. Be thankful for the FULL ISDN experience.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    4. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Modems maxed out at 56k due to the phone company digitization of the analog calls for multiplexing purposes. AIthough that could only be achieved on really clean lines. I think you mean ISDN speed.

    5. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by gmack · · Score: 2

      Actually 128k was dual channel ISDN. Single channel was 64k.

    6. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by magarity · · Score: 1

      I've hit my cap several times and gone to the T-Mobile version of this throttled back speed mechanism. It is still usable for general web. If you need streaming video, pay the overage; otherwise just don't be so twitchy.

    7. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by npslider · · Score: 1

      My old dial-up ISP offered a service where you could use two modems, and dial the ISP to double your speed for an extra 5 dollars a month. Not quite 128 kbps mind you, but getting close.

      I know that modems topped off at 56K, but compared to modern broadband speeds, 128K does almost feel modem-slow!

    8. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by npslider · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I should have said nearly modem like speed, yeah, my trusty U.S. Robotics 56K never got THAT fast. There were days I sure wish somehow it would.

      My first upgrade to the world of DSL was 320K and that did feel like ridiculous speed. Now my cable company offers 1 gig plans... that's just ludicrous speed!

    9. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by npslider · · Score: 1

      Was T-Mobile's throttled speed limit also 128K? Just wondering, I can't get their service here.

    10. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by npslider · · Score: 1

      Wow, so that really is near a 56k modem... that feels like the dark ages now!

    11. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      modem speed reached 64k, the 56k limit was imposed by the phone company to limit crosstalk in the wires, a 56k modem would connect @ 64 k if it was connected the a VOIP line

    12. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by sexconker · · Score: 1

      T-Mobile used to throttle you back to "2G", which they've killed off (or are almost done killing off).
      So T-Mobile now just throttles your speed to some undefined level.

    13. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      I happen to have a PSTN simulator and I've only been able to get two modems to connect at 33.6k synchronous.
      Apparently I need some special hardware to get it to run in asynchronous mode.

      If anyone knows what I would need please let me know it's something i'd like to have in my collection.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    14. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember those, the 112k modem. It was sometimes cheaper than ISDN and you had the ability to still have a real phone working without completely dropping internet.

    15. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by magarity · · Score: 1

      It seems to be dynamic. Once the network icon said '3G' and another time it was '2G'. Probably if you're in an area that still has 2G around, that's what you get.

      Of course, all this aside, ATT still isn't very friendly to international travel. Earlier this year with T-Mobile I got a text message after arriving in Beijing: "Welcome to China, you get unlimited text and 2G data" as included with my basic plan and it worked great. The best part was that it tunneled somehow through the Great Firewall. Google, etc, that are blocked for locals was not on my phone.

    16. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

      I happen to have a PSTN simulator and I've only been able to get two modems to connect at 33.6k synchronous. Apparently I need some special hardware to get it to run in asynchronous mode.

      56k connections (V.90 or V.92) only ever worked at full speed in one direction. They take advantage of the fact that the ISP is using a 64kbps DS0 digital line, so there is only one A/D conversion involved rather than the usual two. The 56k modem protocols were never intended to work with all-analog connections, and a direct link between two 56k client modems would max out at 33.6k (V.34). In theory you could get 56k or better with PCM over a suitably high-quality channel, but the protocols—and more importantly, the modems—weren't designed for that use case. To establish a 56k connection with a standard 56k modem you would need a DS0 connection and suitable ISP-grade equipment on the other side. (Sorry, I wasn't able to find any product links.)

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    17. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      Considering that its a direct wire head to head modem connection over about 10 ft its just about the best quallity connection possible.

      But most people don't have the equipment just lying around to supply pstn voltage and tone to the modems. I still think It should be something as simple as a AT command but it appears most modems were built without the ability to transmit at the higher rates or its disabled in the software.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    18. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

      but it appears most modems were built without the ability to transmit at the higher rates or its disabled in the software

      Well, yes. As I said, consumer-grade modems with analog interfaces weren't designed to establish 56k connections with other analog modems, no matter how good the signal might be. It wouldn't work in most cases anyway and none of the 56k protocols cover that situation. To get 56k in one direction you need the special equipment the ISPs use, which is designed to interface with the phone networks digitally.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    19. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by CrAlt · · Score: 1

      I have T-mobile and its 128K. They don't connect you at "2g" or anything they just throttle you after you hit your limit.
      Forget about streaming video but regular web surfing is OK. Pandora and other streaming audio sites seem to work fine.

      $20month for 2gig data and unlimited talk/text. No contract. No worries about overage costs.

      --
      I have to return some videotapes...
    20. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know that modems topped off at 56K, but compared to modern broadband speeds, 128K does almost feel modem-slow!

      With modems, you almost never got 48k, let alone an actual 56k connection speed. The last modem line I had couldn't exceed about 35k if I remember right.

      So, a guaranteed 128kbit on a cell phone is fine - it will still pull in your email or whatever, but it might take some time to load facebook. Streaming video would be out of the question.

    21. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, I would much rather have the option to forgo the data charges and "smart phone" fees *completely*; pay the same rate for voice and optional text as a dumb "feature phone"), and opt for a "smart phone" that only used WIFI for data with no possible way to hook up to cellular data.

    22. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by antdude · · Score: 1

      Morel ike ISDN.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    23. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      On the rare occasion that I exceed my monthly data, I use the mobile image blocker addon on firefox and websites are pretty snappy, just no pictures (which in many cases actually improves the usability of the website.) And since music is zero rated, that still works fine.

    24. Re:Can we say... MODEM speed? by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      I think realistically you never actually got above 90kbit on those.

  5. Europe does it better.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'm not saying this in a "we're better than you" sort of way, but it really astounds me how the consumers get screwed over so much in the USA. Whether it's phone bills, health care insurance, cable companies or the dozen other topics. You lead the world in so many ways but seem to defend big business that rapes the general public in so many ways. Unfortunately with "lobbying" so inherent it may only get worse.

    1. Re:Europe does it better.. by npslider · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You lead the world in so many ways

      Sadly, it's not the American people leading, but the over sized government-industrial complex that feeds off of them,

    2. Re:Europe does it better.. by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      People are afraid to be accountable, rather then get the government services they want, they would rather let someone dictate what they get and how much, and it better be more then that poor (or non-white).

  6. Access charges are data rape by ITRambo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Subscribers pay for a service. An access charge to let them actually use the service should be illegal as it lets the provider advertise a false bottom line price, while putting the add-on access charge in fine print that many people don't notice. No thanks, AT&T or Verizon for that matter.

    1. Re:Access charges are data rape by known_coward_69 · · Score: 0

      the access charge is for talk/text if you have a dumb phone. the rest is for data

    2. Re:Access charges are data rape by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be true if it were true but it isn't. Even data only plans must pay an access charge.

    3. Re:Access charges are data rape by known_coward_69 · · Score: 1

      they are too much but part of that goes to pay NPAC and other third parties who run services every carrier relies on

    4. Re:Access charges are data rape by swalve · · Score: 1

      The access charge is more of a per-line charge. Shouldn't it cost more to have 50 phones on one account than just one?

    5. Re:Access charges are data rape by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Phone companies should advertise the price they charge, period. The prepaid phones say $40 / month and it's $40. The contract phone companies say $40 and end up charging $53.17.

  7. Data cap exceeded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't download this file: (51GB bzip2)
    >600GB uncompressed

  8. Re:I stopped using AT&T a long time ago.. HINT by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

    Remember the little closet where they wiretapped everybody in San Francisco, CA, USA? Of course you do this is FBI Slashdot.

    Yep. And we know about all the other little closets that everyone else has set up.

    Nobody is Mr. Nice Guy (or Ms. Nice Guy, I suppose, this being Slashdot and all).

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  9. Add AT&T to Fi by SoulMaster · · Score: 1

    Every night, before I go to sleep, I hope and pray to the PTBs that Google will add AT&T to Project Fi's list of carriers. There's a section of the desert between Vegas and LA that is useless on TMo/Sprint/USCellular. Adding AT&T to Fi (and possibly iPhone support for Fi) with decent marketing $ behind it would be the end of direct-from carrier services as we know it here in the U.S.. Needs to happen.

    -SoulMaster

  10. really a price increase by known_coward_69 · · Score: 3, Informative

    they are dropping the data charges but raising the access charge per line by $5. on my 6 line account it would mean $20 less for data but $30 more for access charges which would be a price increase

    1. Re:really a price increase by ScooterComputer · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Same here. The 128Kbps MAX is a joke unworthy of a $5 a month "penalty". I especially like how AT&T tries to wrap the same $5 fee as Verizon's "Safety Mode" as "We're not doing what Verizon is doing. We don't charge you!" Uh huh. And both of them sitting on this 128kbps thing like a badge of honor. 128Kbps is all but unusable. I'd like to see Randall Stephenson do a John Legere and live for a week on 128Kbps data. If he can do it for a day, I'll get off my high horse. (He wouldn't be able to, so, no worries there.) At least Verizon says 128Kbps is what you should expect; AT&T pulls a mealy-mouthed "128Kbps max". Like... what? 2Kbps? 1Kbps? How 'bout we drop into the "human readable bitstream" speeds... Are those possible, acceptable speeds, AT&T? Jerks. 2 steps forward, 3 steps back. Always with these guys.

      --
      Scott
      "Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
    2. Re:really a price increase by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      "but raising the access charge per line by $5"

      My access charge is currently $25 and it would go to $20.

    3. Re:really a price increase by Aqualung812 · · Score: 1

      I've lived through 128k cellular data for a few years. It is still quite useful.

      I can send iMessages, get my email, send email, and sync my newsreader.

      It will also allow my devices to be tracked if lost or stolen.

      I would MUCH rather be throttled for a couple days if I've gone over by accident than be charged when I don't NEED the speed most of the time.

      --
      Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
    4. Re:really a price increase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's max speed. My wife forgot to turn on Wifi, watched Netflix, hit her monthly cap before the month was up with her carrier and got throttled. Well this is when we found out lots of things fail to function when you have a slow connection. She could no longer send MMS at all (not just pictures messages). In fact picture messaging in either direction did not work I could not send her pictures either. It would always just time out. Even smaller file size images would not work. Some web sites will work with a slow connection. However some will just time out and fail to load.

    5. Re:really a price increase by b0bby · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I have Cricket & my kids regularly use up all their data before the end of the month (I never do, so we stay on the lower level plan). 128k is what they get throttled to, and it means that they can't watch youtube etc, but they can stream Pandora just fine and do most everything else they want. I can remember being jealous of people who had an ISDN line back in the day, so I don't feel too bad for them being restricted to that speed on their pocket super computers.

  11. Hidden rate increase? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This looks like a hidden rate increase to me. Rates for data go down but access charges go up. Current: plan with 15 gigs with 4 phones is 100 (data) + 4*15(access charge) = 160. New 16 gigs with 4 phones will be 90(data) +4 *20) =170. $10 increase.

  12. THIS IS NOT AN ADVERTISEMENT FOR ATT by axewolf · · Score: 1

    This is actually relevant information in the industry, not marketing. It's true because we reported it as news and we aren't in any way incompetent or corrupt

  13. Will never cease to amaze me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...how willing phone plebs are to take it up the ass from ATT et. al.

    "Oh, you're only going to sodomize me with the 14 inch horse dildo from now on? Thank you kind and glorious master!"

  14. Good luck actually using it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Recently upgraded my Verizon plan. Immediately, my connection at home started to crawl.

    But I'm sure there is a perfectly good explanation.

  15. overages? access fees? WTH? by scatbomb · · Score: 1

    I'm on MetroPCS. $40/mo for unlimited data, talk, texts. That's the same as ATT's "access fee???"

  16. AT&T Lost My Business by cpbright · · Score: 1

    From 2004 to today I have been using AT&T for my off site instrumentation systems upgrading when needed. I have hundreds of systems. Over the last 6 years they have been gouging customers, including my company, in overages, very poor service, and over charges. In fact we are asking for around $20,000 in over payments to be returned to us. After submitting all the obvious documentation showing their errors over time, they stopped working with us and have started to ignore us. Now I have a lawyer doing all the talking. Since 2015 we have moved most of our equipment over to Verizon with absolutely wonderful results. Even the on line abilities to manage our account of hundreds of units is a dream. AT&T has severe operational and system problems. Too bad, I thought they were awesome until around 2012, now I can't stand them.

  17. 1 GB plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AT&T just kicked me from a 1GB plan to a 2GB plan because they were discontinuing the 1GB plan. Just make up your mind AT&T.

  18. The slow march... by Bartles · · Score: 1

    ...back to unlimited plans, driven by competition continues.

  19. FBI REFLEX MONKEYS WITH BBS MOD POWERS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ^This is a fact.