Slashdot Mirror
Verizon Will Stop Throttling Video On Unlimited Plans If You Pay An Extra $10 Per Month (theverge.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: Two months ago, Verizon implemented a change to all of its unlimited data plans that placed limits on the quality at which users could stream video. The company split its unlimited plan into two tiers, with the cheaper option restricting video streaming to 480p resolution; a higher-priced $85 "Beyond Unlimited" plan tops out at 720p video on smartphones (and 1080p on tablets). The new restrictions immediately applied to all plans and Verizon customers had no way of opting out if they wanted to watch 1080p video on their phone or even higher resolutions on capable devices using mobile data. But now Verizon will give subscribers a way to completely remove the video quality handcuffs -- for an extra $10 every month. If you're willing to pay that $10 charge, you can stream video at the maximum quality supported by any device you've got connected to Verizon, whether it's 1080p, 1440p, or even 4K. But keep in mind that the extra fee is applied per line for anyone on a family plan who wants to lift the limits. Even on a single-line plan, it adds up. Tacking $10 onto Verizon's Beyond Unlimited ratchets up the monthly price to $95. The $10 add-on will be available beginning November 3rd.
Nice try, Verizdumb. We won't be falling for that one again.
Verison, you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"First things first -- but not necessarily in that order"
-- The Doctor, "Doctor
I'll wait for the inevitable Slashdot post 6 months from now, 'Verizon now throttling data for customer's who paid an extra $10'.
No mobile phone carrier provider should be allowed to negatively change the terms of an existing contract, while that contract is in operation, unless they are prepared to allow all existing users on that contract to terminate early and without penalty.
It's that simple.
If they want to improve the service, that is one thing... but it simply is not acceptable to degrade a service once someone has paid for it. Imagine if you ordered a 50" 4K TV from Amazon, but they sent you a 40" TV. When you complained, they try and explain that between the moment you ordered and the moment that they shipped, the terms of the offer changed... I don't think so
If I don't stream videos why should I be subsidizing people who do?
You shouldn't. You should be able to buy a limited plan.
Telecoms have to eat too, don't you know?
Do we get to vote on this?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I wish marketing people short lives and long deaths - stuck in hellish theoretical Math courses forever trying to solve equations for "Beyond Unlimited".
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
I take "unlimited" to simply mean not limited as a consequence of any particular policy. That is to say, that nobody is *actually limiting* it... it may still be limited in the sense that there is a finite bandwidth, but absent any explicit policy which specifies any upper limit, it can still be reasonably taken as unlimited.
I have unlimited nationwide long distance calling on my cell phone plan, for example. While I am theoretically limited in how much I can *actually* use that benefit because of the finite number of hours in a day and the finite amount of days in each billing period, that theoretical limit is not something that actually impacts (nor can it impact) how much I am allowed to use my phone for such purposes without paying extra fees or suffering some additional inconvenience imposed upon me which was caused solely by my own usage patterns.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Probably not, with the new FCC boss.
When VZW won the auction for their new LTE bands back in 2008, one of the requirements was Open applications: Consumers should be able to download and utilize any software applications, content, or services they desire
This move appears to violate that provision - it treats some content differently than other content. And before someone argues that they still offer to transport higher quality video content, I'll point out that it's a matter of degree. If they can charge $10/mo, how is that different than them charging $1,000,000 per connection and effectively blocking that content, other than in degree? The clear intent of the rules was to require VZW be blind to the content.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
I find it highly unlikely that they can even tell what traffic I have on my VPN.....
"Pray I do not alter them further."
If they can't tell it's video, they can't throttle.
"Forget the engineers." -Carly Fiorina, briber of MIT Technology Review.
Yeah right. Even cellular Internet is slow. Why even bother to try to stream videos if its Internet is slow enough? :(
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).