FCC Wants To Know How Wireless Carriers Manage Data

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
People always ask why i dont have a smart phone and this kind of stuff is why. If i pay for a phone that can play 1080P videos off the internet and i have to pay the ridiculously high monthly bills i expect to have no data restrictions on how much data i use. If i want to use 50gb a month in pretty sure the 80$ or more per month bill should cover that and then some. You might say deal with it thats how it is, so i did deal with it and i use a 10$ tracfone for when i really need to talk while im out, and i have my free VOIP home phone that works just as good as anything.
 
People always ask why i dont have a smart phone and this kind of stuff is why. If i pay for a phone that can play 1080P videos off the internet and i have to pay the ridiculously high monthly bills i expect to have no data restrictions on how much data i use. If i want to use 50gb a month in pretty sure the 80$ or more per month bill should cover that and then some. You might say deal with it thats how it is, so i did deal with it and i use a 10$ tracfone for when i really need to talk while im out, and i have my free VOIP home phone that works just as good as anything.
Click to expand...

Hah, you should try my country. Typical carrier data plans cap bandwidth over 500mb a month or 10mb a day, whichever comes first. 50GB is the monthly cap for DSL connections on many providers. I got a 5000 USD (yes, 5 grand) bill from my provider regarding 32GB of monthly 3G usage.
 
Last month I used 119GB of data on my phone watching netflix streaming on my HDTV through Slimport on my Nexus 5. No thottling going on here 😉 T-Mobile's unlimited plan rocks.
 
All smartphone plans should be unlimited data with maybe a price about $40 to $50. And I really really hate this mobile data sharing these companies are trying to push. I refuse to move to that type of plan. So we go from unlimited plans to sharing 2 to 10gb a month. For virtually the same cost yet they want us to think its cheaper for the consumer now. Pffft.
 
Just want to echo the theme of these comments - Verizon capping people using over 4.7 GB of data? What about those of us who actually PAY for 6GB or more per month? Lame.
 
Average money grabbing businesses. AT&T and Verizon are both amongst many ISPs who are going against net neutrality charging many sites in order to give their subscribers better connections to the site. (ie netflix)

This is outrageous and should be taken very seriously. Why do these companies always need more money when they all have so much of it?
 
Somewhat off topic, but in the last cellular article didn't someone politely ask to stop using that ridiculous gory photo? YES! they did and I have to fully agree with them. The is no place for that and if you think there is you have issues. And FWIW, I also refuse to pay for those stupid phones and their overpriced services as well.
 
Just to clarify for you hokkdawg, this only applies(for now) to the Verizon customers that are locked into the older unlimited data plans. As for Wheeler being "deeply troubled" by this news, well I guess Verizon is going to have to start putting a little more in his pockets each month to get past this huh?
 
Throttling based on total bandwidth use does not make sense, as it has nothing to do with congestion. a network is limited by simultaneous throughput. Meaning what a user did in the past should have no impact on the network today. A user who downloaded 4.7GB of data a few days ago will not make for them trying to go to a website like CNN.com any harder on the network than a user who did nothing on the network before trying to go to the same website.
Verizon is applying the throttling to users on the unlimited plans at traffic levels that is less than some users who are on a limited plan where they pay for a fixed amount of data.

Also the fact that they are throttling instead of upgrading also goes to show what they think about their customers.
 


The FCC is usually pretty strict on what they enforce being a government affiliated set of standards. Although the USA government is corrupt (as is mostly every other government gone wild like us) standards are standards. They can't really be bent around like a loophole in a law could. They spend a lot of time organizing and setting these up. He only initiated this and now probably a group of people are going to look over the data. I feel a successful hit on the phone providers incoming.
 
Wheeler voices his concern, though before Obama appointed him chairman of the FCC, he was a top lobbyist for cable and wireless companies.

There's a reason Wheeler is where he is and it's not to protect consumers. The "deeply concerned" stance of his is all a muse. The wireless companies and cable companies will always come out on the winning end of things as long as Wheeler holds his current position. An example of his deep concern is how cable companies are eroding net neutrality. Before Wheeler, we didn't have this.

Also, for you cable subscribers, get ready for a price hike with regard to cable packages containing local networks. No longer will they be part of a 'basic' package. Legislation is currently under review to raise the cost of getting local channels through cable. Check out keepmytv.org.

So we have the erosion of net neutrality and the current threat of price increases just to receive what would be free channels over the air through cable all on Wheeler's watch. He hasn't even held his position that long; not even a year (appointed Nov 4, 2013). He was head of the NCTA and CTIA serving as president and CEO for both organizations.

And for you cord cutters, the next step will be to eliminate public broadcasts of the major networks.

I would be extremely surprised to see any result favoring consumers with regard to Wheeler's deep concern.
 
It seems to me that if Verizon has sold a product, they should stand behind it. If those unlimited users are creating congestion, it is less an issue of the unlimited users and more an indication that Verizon needs to increase their infrastructure in that area to support its paying customer base.

They word their response to defend the non-unlimited users, to deflect their responsibility. They refer to the top 5% unlimited users as data-hogs, but the reality is that they are using the service that they paid for, and were promised, and signed a contract to have. In this situation the appropriate response for Verizon is to identify the points in their network where there is congestion, and if they need to throttle those points so that all users have a better experience then they should down throttle everyone regardless of plan equally OR add/upgrade the infrastructure at those points to provide better service.

The moral of this story is don't sell what you can not support, and don't treat one paying customer differently than another paying customer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom