Because the term "unlimited" means "without limits", and throttling is a limitation. Because they try to have their cake and eat it too by saying that bandwidth is so important and they are stretched so far to the limit and it affects everyone everywhere and threatens society as we know it, but then says they that throttling isn't bad at all cause they only throttle the top 2% of users. Well which is it -- the end of the world or only the top 2%? Or are they trying to tell us that their network is so crappy that a mere 2% of their users are able to destabilize the whole thing simply by being active for longer periods of time than the rest of us?
Bandwidth is like a highway. What causes congestion is more people on the road during busy hours, not how long they're on it during off-peak times. If bandwidth really is a problem maybe they should take some of the billions they rake in each year and actually spend it on infrastructure instead of corporate payouts, bonuses, and evil geniuses whose sole job is to think of new and exciting ways to screw us.
Let's then also sell handsets at a fair price instead of a grossly-inflated one, charge fair prices for text and data plans, stop throttling altogether, have options to cut off service in case of overages to eliminate bill shock, completely eliminate ETFs, and allow multiple devices to share a single data plan.
What's that? You can't bank billions if you have to start treating your customers fairly and honestly? You don't say...
Yet despite what most citizens of the United States believe they are NOT the only "AMERICANS", as anyone living anywhere in either North, South, or Central AMERICA can lay claim to that title.
A severe form of dyspepsia triggered by any mention of the tech company Apple, particularly in regard to their wanton abuse of the patent and legal systems.
Yes, you are. Learn how to use Google. It's not my job to educate you, and I really don't care if you believe me or not. While there are models of jammers that can go long distances and pass thru structures they are not the small pocket models being discussed here.
OK, now you're just being ridiculous. Or did you miss the part about how these things have, at best, a 10 meter range and can't pass thru metal and glass?
Yes, I'm going to make that comparison because in most cases a moving interference source, y'know, *moves*, and doesn't stay put and therefore won't be around you for very long.
Transmit power for the low cost devices is less than 1 watt and they have a range of no more than 10 meters at best. And yes, it doesn't pass thru metal or glass, which means it's not getting out of the bus.
I dunno where you live and what kind of buses you've been on, but nicely asking someone to be quiet is rarely ever met with peaceful compliance. More likely you're going to get an earful of profanity hurled at you and possibly even a physical altercation.
True story: I was recently on a Trailways bus. And the driver made it very clear that if you must use your cell phone it needs to be quiet and brief. Yet one asshat decided the rules didn't apply to him and halfway thru the trip he just started loudly yakking away. The driver told him once to end the call. Then again to end the call. And then a third time. Finally the driver stopped the bus and told the guy either he STFU or he's gonna toss him off the bus. The guy finally got off the cell phone, and then proceeded to bitch and moan like a petulant child for the remainder of the trip, and even had the gall to make snarky remarks to the driver when he called dispatch using a cell phone.
So I'm sorry, but no, politely asking the loud-talker to tone it down rarely ever works. If they're so arrogant to not care about disturbing others while on the phone what makes you think they'll suddenly care when you ask them nicely to hush up? I mean, you see these responses right here in this thread -- "if you don't like it use earplugs", or "what gives you the right to tell me I can't talk on the phone". What makes you think you're going to get a different response in person?
Or (god help them) happen to be sitting in their car in a cell-signal dead zone! I mean, like, cause that never happens, amirite?
Not to mention these things aren't powerful enough to penetrate metal or glass, so they won't affect anything outside the bus. Physics is silly like that.
"What's wrong with riding the bus? Is it because it exudes 'low-class' to you?"
Yup. Exactamundo. Not something I want to see in my medical professionals. I like to think they're at least successful enough to own a car or afford car service.
I guess they never, ever go on a subway? Or airplane? Or in an elevator? Or the out to the country? Or any other place they may not get a cell signal?
I'd think I'd be more concerned to learn my my doctor, surgeon or psychologist rides a bus.
This guy is my new hero, even though he later backed down and said he wasn't going to use it anymore. I for one am fed up with the constant assault of cell phone conversations from people who have no idea how to be considerate to those around them.
This. Piracy is an indicator of a broken system and pissed off people. The only way to quell the piracy is to give the people what they want -- a good product at a fair price and at least the impression they are being treated fairly and are important customers. And since that's unlikely to happen, I don't see anything changing anytime soon.
Because higher fuel efficiency leads to lower oil profits? DUH. Hell, I'm not even some fancy economist with a fancy ivy league degree and even I can see that.
If Microsoft wants to give me a free copy of Windows 7, write drivers for all the devices I own that don't work under Win7, and kick in some hardware upgrades to ensure Win7 runs smoothly then I'm all aboard.
I have a number of older machines around the house that perform various functions. It would be absolutely retarded to spend $120 for a new OS for a machine that's not even worth that. And at least another $50-$100 to upgrade them to be able to run it, not to mention the time and energy to do the upgrade and get everything configured and working. And this doesn't include all the add-in cards and peripherals I would have to replace (at least another $300+).
If it ain't broke don't fix it.
Y'know, this has never occurred to me, but it's a really great point. There are a lot of movies that want to see but simply won't due to the cost, mostly "smaller" films that don't benefit from the big screen. But if I could see them for, say, $3-5 instead of $8-10+, well then I think there's a much greater chance of me going to the theater.
Toss in reasonably-priced popcorn and soda and it would be a no-brainer.
Alas you're dealing with a dinosaur industry that doesn't seem to understand it needs to adapt if it wants to survive. So sadly I don't really have any hope of the system changing any time soon.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Sounds like a lot of iPhanbois with a mouth full of sour grapes. Then again, it's the New York Times. Were you expecting something unbiased?
Slashdot Mirror
Because the term "unlimited" means "without limits", and throttling is a limitation. Because they try to have their cake and eat it too by saying that bandwidth is so important and they are stretched so far to the limit and it affects everyone everywhere and threatens society as we know it, but then says they that throttling isn't bad at all cause they only throttle the top 2% of users. Well which is it -- the end of the world or only the top 2%? Or are they trying to tell us that their network is so crappy that a mere 2% of their users are able to destabilize the whole thing simply by being active for longer periods of time than the rest of us?
Bandwidth is like a highway. What causes congestion is more people on the road during busy hours, not how long they're on it during off-peak times. If bandwidth really is a problem maybe they should take some of the billions they rake in each year and actually spend it on infrastructure instead of corporate payouts, bonuses, and evil geniuses whose sole job is to think of new and exciting ways to screw us.
Wouldn't have anything to do with it being poorly ported code? Nah. Can't be.
Let's then also sell handsets at a fair price instead of a grossly-inflated one, charge fair prices for text and data plans, stop throttling altogether, have options to cut off service in case of overages to eliminate bill shock, completely eliminate ETFs, and allow multiple devices to share a single data plan.
What's that? You can't bank billions if you have to start treating your customers fairly and honestly? You don't say...
Yet despite what most citizens of the United States believe they are NOT the only "AMERICANS", as anyone living anywhere in either North, South, or Central AMERICA can lay claim to that title.
iDisgust
A severe form of dyspepsia triggered by any mention of the tech company Apple, particularly in regard to their wanton abuse of the patent and legal systems.
Yes, you are. Learn how to use Google. It's not my job to educate you, and I really don't care if you believe me or not. While there are models of jammers that can go long distances and pass thru structures they are not the small pocket models being discussed here.
OK, now you're just being ridiculous. Or did you miss the part about how these things have, at best, a 10 meter range and can't pass thru metal and glass?
Yes, I'm going to make that comparison because in most cases a moving interference source, y'know, *moves*, and doesn't stay put and therefore won't be around you for very long.
Transmit power for the low cost devices is less than 1 watt and they have a range of no more than 10 meters at best. And yes, it doesn't pass thru metal or glass, which means it's not getting out of the bus.
I dunno where you live and what kind of buses you've been on, but nicely asking someone to be quiet is rarely ever met with peaceful compliance. More likely you're going to get an earful of profanity hurled at you and possibly even a physical altercation.
True story: I was recently on a Trailways bus. And the driver made it very clear that if you must use your cell phone it needs to be quiet and brief. Yet one asshat decided the rules didn't apply to him and halfway thru the trip he just started loudly yakking away. The driver told him once to end the call. Then again to end the call. And then a third time. Finally the driver stopped the bus and told the guy either he STFU or he's gonna toss him off the bus. The guy finally got off the cell phone, and then proceeded to bitch and moan like a petulant child for the remainder of the trip, and even had the gall to make snarky remarks to the driver when he called dispatch using a cell phone.
So I'm sorry, but no, politely asking the loud-talker to tone it down rarely ever works. If they're so arrogant to not care about disturbing others while on the phone what makes you think they'll suddenly care when you ask them nicely to hush up? I mean, you see these responses right here in this thread -- "if you don't like it use earplugs", or "what gives you the right to tell me I can't talk on the phone". What makes you think you're going to get a different response in person?
Or (god help them) happen to be sitting in their car in a cell-signal dead zone! I mean, like, cause that never happens, amirite?
Not to mention these things aren't powerful enough to penetrate metal or glass, so they won't affect anything outside the bus. Physics is silly like that.
Ripping software should strip out any Macrovision protection.
"What's wrong with riding the bus? Is it because it exudes 'low-class' to you?"
Yup. Exactamundo. Not something I want to see in my medical professionals. I like to think they're at least successful enough to own a car or afford car service.
Or maybe they just drove into a tunnel?
I guess they never, ever go on a subway? Or airplane? Or in an elevator? Or the out to the country? Or any other place they may not get a cell signal? I'd think I'd be more concerned to learn my my doctor, surgeon or psychologist rides a bus.
This guy is my new hero, even though he later backed down and said he wasn't going to use it anymore. I for one am fed up with the constant assault of cell phone conversations from people who have no idea how to be considerate to those around them.
You comb thru the data to find anything incriminating and then extort the owner. Seriously, are you not an American?
First SOPA, then PIPA, now ACTA. Our corporate overlords will not be pleased at seeing all their bribe, er, contribution money go down the toilet.
This. Piracy is an indicator of a broken system and pissed off people. The only way to quell the piracy is to give the people what they want -- a good product at a fair price and at least the impression they are being treated fairly and are important customers. And since that's unlikely to happen, I don't see anything changing anytime soon.
I'd much rather he learn empathy, humility, and how to not be a giant fucking jackass. Baby steps I guess.
Because higher fuel efficiency leads to lower oil profits? DUH. Hell, I'm not even some fancy economist with a fancy ivy league degree and even I can see that.
And how exactly does a California law have any bearing whatsoever in China?
If Microsoft wants to give me a free copy of Windows 7, write drivers for all the devices I own that don't work under Win7, and kick in some hardware upgrades to ensure Win7 runs smoothly then I'm all aboard. I have a number of older machines around the house that perform various functions. It would be absolutely retarded to spend $120 for a new OS for a machine that's not even worth that. And at least another $50-$100 to upgrade them to be able to run it, not to mention the time and energy to do the upgrade and get everything configured and working. And this doesn't include all the add-in cards and peripherals I would have to replace (at least another $300+). If it ain't broke don't fix it.
Y'know, this has never occurred to me, but it's a really great point. There are a lot of movies that want to see but simply won't due to the cost, mostly "smaller" films that don't benefit from the big screen. But if I could see them for, say, $3-5 instead of $8-10+, well then I think there's a much greater chance of me going to the theater. Toss in reasonably-priced popcorn and soda and it would be a no-brainer. Alas you're dealing with a dinosaur industry that doesn't seem to understand it needs to adapt if it wants to survive. So sadly I don't really have any hope of the system changing any time soon.
I was thinking exactly the same thing. Sounds like a lot of iPhanbois with a mouth full of sour grapes. Then again, it's the New York Times. Were you expecting something unbiased?
Or maybe they can all fuck off and die.
Cost of living went up this year, hence the increases. But it's been stagnant since 2008.