Why do people tolerate this? *wireless rant*

[krash]

Its even MORE stupid when you have an unlimited data plan with verizon, but still get charged the fee for tethering. I'm gonna root hahah

[PoorManQ45]

so tell me guys, if I use my 5GB a month with just the handset do you have an issue with that?

[szh]

I have a Sprint WiMAX 4G device (the OverDrive 3G/4G) that I use as a data access card when I travel. Single fixed charge per month and it allows up to 5 WiFi users to connect to it.

When I was in Orlando last week at a small meeting (four people), the others could not get WiFi access at the place we were at. So, I opened up the OverDrive for them to access (normally leave it locked to just my PC) and it worked like a charm for all computers (one was a MacBook Pro).

My test in the Bay Area show: 5 to 6Mbits/sec down, 1 to 1.5Mbits/sec up ... in 4G mode. When in 3G (ANSI-2000 CDMA), the rates are lower: 0.8 - 2Mbits/sec down and 0.4 to 0.9Mbits/sec up. Good enough for what I need it for.

BTW, since I do not download videos or torrent any files, etc., my typical use in a month is well under 1GB - even if it were my sole way to access the Internet. So, even though I do not have a limit on the 4G access bytes with Sprint, the typical 5GB limits with other carriers would be good enough for me.

Bottom line: expecting to get unlimited usage for wireless is not realistic. Unlike copper and fiber connections, wireless spectrum is limited, so sharing is required in the cell you are in. If the carrier did NOT limit people somehow (rate or total use), then the spectrum would get overloaded to the point of uselessness.

Z

[szh]

so tell me guys, if I use my 5GB a month with just the handset do you have an issue with that?

No.

If you want to use more, you can certainly pay for it too.

Z

[Jesda]

so tell me guys, if I use my 5GB a month with just the handset do you have an issue with that?

I certainly don't, but if you go over, you'll pay for it as you probably should.



I also forgot to say: GET OFF MY LAWN!

[PoorManQ45]

so tell me guys, if I use my 5GB a month with just the handset do you have an issue with that?

No.

If you want to use more, you can certainly pay for it too.

Z

So then there should not be an issue with a computer using that same 5GB in a month, correct?

[Jesda]

The issue is that if you use a PC, no matter how much of that data you use, you're more -likely- to use more of it.

You are paying for 5GB of handset data, not PC data. By restricting your data usage to your handset, its harder to use it all, thus the pricing.

[Jesda]

Two people walk into a buffet.

One is me.
One is PMQ.

Who do you think is going to eat more? The restaurant sets a weight-based buffet price and charges me an additional $5. Is that wrong? I don't think it is. Sure, you could call it discriminatory or whatever, but its just an analogy.

You can average 40mph as a teen driver and never get a ticket, but the likelihood if you doing that is low. Insurance charges you extra for being a teen to mitigate costs.

[PoorManQ45]

The issue is that if you use a PC, no matter how much of that data you use, you're more -likely- to use more of it.

You are paying for 5GB of handset data, not PC data. By restricting your data usage to your handset, its harder to use it all, thus the pricing.

I'm really confused. I asked a direct question and you answered. You said that you have no issue with using 5GB of data with a handset, but if I use that same 5GB of data with a PC it is an issue?

So, if the issue is that carriers don't want you to use your data completely why do they sell you a package with that much allotted to you?

[Jesda]

I'm not sure why you are confused by this.

You are given 5GB of "handset" data. It is "handset" data because if you used it with your PC, you would use more than a typical handset, which would burden the network capacity.

[PoorManQ45]

That's exactly what's confusing me.

Lets take Nicoclub as an example. There is no mobile version of this site. If I load it on a PC it uses the same exact amount and type of data as a Handset. This is where my confusion is at with your statements.

[Jesda]

There's nothing to be confused about. You use much more data on your PC than you do on your handset.

This is why mobile data is typically restricted to handsets.

[RCA]

Jesda isn't making a distinction between data used on a PC or a Handset he is just stating that people who tether to PCs are more likely to go over their caps.

Them going over their caps puts extra stress on the network. This extra pressure in turn creates high maintenance and possible hardware upgrades. This will be reflected in the prices for data.

Eventually increasing the prices he pays for data even though he didn't go over his caps.

[PoorManQ45]

There's nothing to be confused about. You use much more data on your PC than you do on your handset.

This is why mobile data is typically restricted to handsets.

You did not address my confusion about your statements at all. I asked a very pointed question.

You keep saying that handsets use less data, but then you turn around to say that if I hit my data cap on the phone that that is perfectly acceptable. What if I do this consistently?

5GB of data is 5GB of data. It doesn't matter if it comes from a Handset, PS3, Laptop, etc... It's the same amount of data.

Saying that one type of device should be completely allowed to use that amount of data but not other devices does not make any sense.

[PoorManQ45]

Jesda isn't making a distinction between data used on a PC or a Handset he is just stating that people who tether to PCs are more likely to go over their caps.

Them going over their caps puts extra stress on the network. This extra pressure in turn creates high maintenance and possible hardware upgrades. This will be reflected in the prices for data.

Eventually increasing the prices he pays for data even though he didn't go over his caps.

Ah, ok.

So Jesda, if this is a correct summary of your argument, would you say that throttling after the cap is reached would be a good idea then?

Tmobile currently does this to an extreme manner. After 5GB you are knocked down to GPRS which is 60kbps. Dial-up being 56kbps.

[Jesda]

What part of this is baffling?

You may be given a 5GB allotment, but you're going to use less of it if you are only using a handset. The system is built to serve the needs of average users, currently 200-300MB. The 5GB cap is intended to relieve bandwidth anxiety for the standard customer.

If the system was built for PCs, the data charge would be higher (it is, for tethering and data-integrated netbooks) because the network infrastructure would have to expand to support it. That expansion is funded by fees.

[Jesda]

Of course, in AT&T's case, there's not really a whole lot of network expansion.

Thus the reason I'm not an ATT customer.

[PoorManQ45]

What part of this is baffling?

You may be given a 5GB allotment, but you're going to use less of it if you are only using a handset. The system is built to serve the needs of average users, currently 200-300MB. The 5GB cap is intended to relieve bandwidth anxiety for the standard customer.

If the system was built for PCs, the data charge would be higher (it is, for tethering and data-integrated netbooks) because the network infrastructure would have to expand to support it. That expansion is funded by fees.

So then should people that max out their data allotment with only their handsets every month be charged the same tethering fee?

[Jesda]

Are you being charged a tethering fee for only using your handset?

There's overage fees for extra gigs of data, and throttling, but I've never heard of a tethering fee for using 5GB on your handset. If T-Mo is doing that to you, you need to get on their case or switch carriers.

Pricing is based on statistical analysis. The stats reflect typical usage, not outliers.

[PoorManQ45]

Are you being charged a tethering fee for only using your handset?

There's overage fees for extra gigs of data, and throttling, but I've never heard of a tethering fee for using 5GB on your handset. If T-Mo is doing that to you, you need to get on their case or switch carriers.

Pricing is based on statistical analysis. The stats reflect typical usage, not outliers.

There is not a fee for using the data on the handset. I am asking you if, based on your viewpoint of load on the network, you think that there should be a penalty for someone that consistently uses up all their data allotment with just their handset.

[Jesda]

There is not a fee for using the data on the handset. I am asking you if, based on your viewpoint of load on the network, you think that there should be a penalty for someone that consistently uses up all their data allotment with just their handset.

Pricing is based on statistical analysis. The stats reflect typical usage, not outliers.

A quarter percent of handset users exceeding 5GB is not statistically relevant enough to adjust pricing. However, if that half percent grew to 4% or 5%, then there might be new fees to pay for the cost of upgrading the network.

[Jesda]

You are really dumb.

[PoorManQ45]

So, if I already use the complete 5GB of data with only the handset consistently on a month to month basis what is the issue with me instead using that data tethered to a computer?

Also, how do you factor in people like SZH that actually don't use their WWAN much and stay under even 2GB?

[PoorManQ45]

Hey Jesda, if you're still viewing this, I have another question/situation for you:

I'm currently tethered to my phone right now on lunch. I usually do this about 20 times a month for a one hour period. I've been average about 30MB down and 3MB up. This works out to about 660MB of data used in a month from tethering. My throttle limit is at 5GB.

Note, I am doing regular browsing. No videos or downloading. Just regular surfing to about ~50 pages at a time.

Given this amount of data used from tethering would you say that I should still pay the tethering service fee?

What I'm really trying to figure out is if you think there should be a threshold for extra fees to be applied or if it should be a straight flat rate fee for people that don't use more then 100MB a month tethering and for those that max out the data limit every month.

*edit* as a reference, I'm currently at ~800MB of data used for this billing cycle. It ends on the 6th. This includes both handset and laptop data.

*edit2 * Today I used 7MB of data at lunchtime. Damn, it's even lower then I thought!

[AppleBonker]

PMQ, how do you not get this? You seriously have a problem. The rules state that if you tether a computer, you have to pay more. So yes, you should be paying for tethering right now as those are the rules. You not liking the rule doesn't make it invalid. If you don't like it, go somewhere else or try to get the rule changed. Pretty simple concept, IMO.

I'll leave this here, as it is the important part:

Pricing is based on statistical analysis. The stats reflect typical usage, not outliers.

You may not fit the standard (or average) assessment, but that doesn't change the rule.

[PoorManQ45]

PMQ, how do you not get this? You seriously have a problem. The rules state that if you tether a computer, you have to pay more. So yes, you should be paying for tethering right now as those are the rules. You not liking the rule doesn't make it invalid. If you don't like it, go somewhere else or try to get the rule changed. Pretty simple concept, IMO.

This is supposed to be a discussion as to the logic/reasoning behind the rules. Accepting the rules was never the point.

BTW, Tmobile does not have a clause in any of their documents that requires you to purchase their tethering package. They offer it. This is different from ATT which does say that a tethering package is required.

Now, based on that statement, what are your thoughts about the rules given all the information that has been provided here and that you have experience with?

[PoorManQ45]

You can average 40mph as a teen driver and never get a ticket, but the likelihood if you doing that is low. Insurance charges you extra for being a teen to mitigate costs.

I know this isn't a car reference, but I'd like to make one from it.

The speed limit on X road is 60MPH. In vehicle Y you can get to that speed limit in 10 seconds. In vehicle Z you can get to it in 3 seconds.

The way I am viewing your argument is that vehicle Z not be allowed on the road without paying an extra fee simply because it has the capability to hit the limit much faster.

[C-Kwik]

This is supposed to be a discussion as to the logic/reasoning behind the rules. Accepting the rules was never the point.

The logic is simple. Wireless carriers want to make more money. They have something many people would pay for so they will charge for it and hopefully meet their goal of making money.

If you want a more statistical based reasoning, its simple. The rate at which people can consume data on a phone is likely less than on a PC for most uses. So if you did your browsing during your lunch strictly by phone, you will probably download less data. If you take a statistical average of the difference and multiply it by the number of people who tether, you would find there is increased load on the carriers. They probably already accounted for this in the pricing. But open the tethering up for free access and many of those deterred by conscience or lack of resourcefulness to find a workaround are likely to start tethering. This would be increased load that they did not model for.

BTW, Tmobile does not have a clause in any of their documents that requires you to purchase their tethering package. They offer it. This is different from ATT which does say that a tethering package is required.

Huh? ATT requires people to pay for tethering? Perhaps I'm missing some prior context, but I'm not aware of any company requiring anyone to pay for tethering to own a phone and use it on their network. I don't have a contract from either carrier to look at to confirm this, but anecdotally, if ATT required tethering with their phones, they wouldn't be telling iphone users to pay for tethering or stop doing it. And from a quick search, some tech news sites reported that T-Mobile did indicate that tethering was not allowed per their terms and conditions. Again, perhaps I'm misunderstanding the context of the statement so feel free to clarify if that's the case.

[Ozzie]

People arguing with PMQ, and getting nowhere..... surprised?

This thread is loaded with ananolgies that make no sense....... like this..
"The speed limit on X road is 60MPH. In vehicle Y you can get to that speed limit in 10 seconds. In vehicle Z you can get to it in 3 seconds.

The way I am viewing your argument is that vehicle Z not be allowed on the road without paying an extra fee simply because it has the capability to hit the limit much faster."


So, because you can drive to NY from Alabama faster than the next guy, I should have to pay for your extra fuel for holding your foot to the floor the whole time?
You CAN NOT compare cell phone data plans to typical ADSL data plans.
They run on different networks for a start.....
Brian, with all your research skills, you should know better than to compare apples to big block chevs running on a methanol/banana skin hybrid fuel.

I am starting to wonder, are you actually smart, or "Bing" search smart?
Or, do you just enjoy enciting pointless argument?
(see, I can be controversial too!)

[szh]

People arguing with PMQ, and getting nowhere..... surprised?

Not surprised.

You CAN NOT compare cell phone data plans to typical ADSL data plans.
They run on different networks for a start.....

Yup.

Like I said in an earlier post on page 1 ... looks like it was ignored: "Bottom line: expecting to get unlimited usage for wireless is not realistic. Unlike copper and fiber connections, wireless spectrum is limited, so sharing is required in the cell you are in. If the carrier did NOT limit people somehow (rate or total use), then the spectrum would get overloaded to the point of uselessness."

Z