Droid X Owners Consuming 5x as Much Data

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Regulas

Distinguished
May 11, 2008
520
0
18,930
[citation][nom]someuser[/nom]is it really that big in your hand? :|[/citation]
They used that guy with the little hands from the Burger King Commercial, LOL It is pretty big though, but not too big, I like it myself.
 

pandemonium_ctp

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2009
35
0
18,580
[citation][nom]EnFoRceR22[/nom]Where did it say they couldnt handle the data? ATT litteraly couldnt handle the data it cut out or just wouldnt work. But verizon hasnt done that. So where did you make any sense? They from what i got from it would be moving thier cell broadband to what thier fios is. Tier service. Which im assuming you dont know what that means since you assumed it was because thier network couldnt handle data. So 3 lvls of service. Low end data user Mid grade and high data user. its how almost all ISP's work. The cell market is starting to catch up with desktop use in terms of bandwidth.[/citation]

Mmkay fanboi.

There's a pretty big difference between data usage caps, and bandwidth caps.

Your assumptions only identified who you were...not me. :p

[citation][nom]dark_knight33[/nom]One more thing, if (according to ATT) 65% of smart users only use 200MB/mo or less, how is soft-limiting them to that amount going to do anything to improve network congestion? Sounds to me like they just want to further monetize the user who occasionally breaks his/her habits. If they *really* wanted to improve network congestion, they would simply throttle the heaviest users on the network based on their EIN. If you get someone who ditches their home cable/internet package and likes to tether their cell for Hulu at home, that is abusing the network IMO. Those are the ones that you need to rake over the coals. Not the consumer base as a whole. Think people don't do that? : http://www.ipadforums.net/ipad-gen [...] u-wtf.html[/citation]

Nailed it, sir. Well done.
 

TheKurrgan

Distinguished
Sep 16, 2008
147
0
18,630
Verizon has less of an excuse to go to a tiered system than att did. Verizon's network uses a narrow channel spacing, 1 mhz to be exact, where as ATT uses 5. This may seem like ATT would have more capacity, but the wider channel spacing limits range and increases noise, as well as limits the tower association count. Verizon using the 1mhz channel limits noise, goes a little farther and allows more associations to a single tower. Also Verizons spec allows more than one tower to be used.. meaning if tower A has better signal strength but is at or close to capacity, it'll use tower B instead.. ATT can do this same thing to a lesser extent, because the wider channel makes noise at weaker signal levels worse than Verizon.
All this said, I am pretty sure ATT is simply trying to recoup revenues.. as I can tell you that even the BlackBerry curve users at my workplace, use more than 250MB a month in email alone. And I've yet to see anyone who uses a higher level device stay below 2GB.. iPhone users at the same place consume about 5GB a month at a minimum, with the highest one (being me) using about 60GB a month (Because att started raping people, I figured I'd abuse my unlimited data plan status and stream music constantly and even though wifi is available, not use it)
ATT also has to play catchup with Verizon.. building 100 cell sites in 100 days isnt cheap. Thats their mission in California right now, and each site averages 650K. So they gotta recoup their revenues some how right? But the best thing Verizon could do is stay unlimited for another 2 years, and let the iPhone eventually land on their network or people to simply start jumping ship from ATT due to overages. Verizon will continue to be the pain in the ass of a life time for ATT when it comes to new customers.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I cannot feel sorry for these mobile carriers, they all cannot wait to have these devices on their network, run television commercials touting how great they and their coverage is over the other carrier. They want the public to move into mobile devices, and then they cry fowl when we move to and use our mobile devices.

I guess NOW the carriers want us to buy these smartphones and purchase at $29.99 plan with 250 anytime minutes and be happy with that.
 

mdillenbeck

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2008
283
0
18,930
[citation][nom]dark_knight33[/nom]If you get someone who ditches their home cable/internet package and likes to tether their cell for Hulu at home, that is abusing the network IMO.[/citation]

One could easily argue the same thing - someone who streams video on a shared cable internet broadband connection should be equally in violation of abusing the network. After all, the internet was and should always be about sharing text-only documents, like email or imageless pages.

My primary use of my cellphone is to get me email via push - an I get a lot between work, school, and my personal life.

My secondary purpose is to have the internet with me on the go - whether I use it with the built-in GPS and google maps or On Course Navigator, browse the web to find a good restaurant or movie when on the go, check prices at competitors when in the store, or read reviews of products I forgot to look up.

My third use is to tether (which I pay extra for an a plan they are allowed to call "unlimited" but is defined as 5 GB - I believe I heard someone mention regulation, which I am all for). Why? Many of the spots I like to go to do not offer free wifi, or if they do they block so many different type of sites I use that it is useless. (For example, I was trying to update my system on the go last week and the free wifi blocked any site with an exe or driver download on it - so I tethered.)

However, I need to note we are not talking about tethering - we are talking about in phone usage. If you make a phone flash capable and sell HDMI cables to connect it to your TV, do you think people won't use sites like Hulu? If you market it as a multimedia phone with FULL web browsing capabilities, am I suppose to set it to text only and limit my usage? If you market it as an always-connected-to-the-internet 3G tablet, am I not suppose to use it like my netbook?

I think those of us upset about the plan change comes mainly from the lack of choice. IF I know I will use 10 GB of data, and you know there are 5% of your customers that use that much regularly, WHY don't you have a premium priced plan option for that?

Additionally, what is going to stop them from culling the "top 5%" of abusers in another year. They can just keep claiming that the majority of their users "only use" x MB per month, and thus having "unlimited" plans of y MB plus 1 cent per KB over makes sense. Net result, if you use a smartphone for what the carriers and manufacturers advertise it as being able to do, then you may wind up paying thousands of dollars a month. That would be equally unfair as allowing for unlimited plans.
 

enforcer22

Distinguished
Sep 10, 2006
330
0
18,930
[citation][nom]dark_knight33[/nom]I'm assuming *you* don't know, but the "tiered" service between FIOS and what VZ is proposing for their cell plans is completely different. FIOS currently is a speed based cap, e.g. 20 down/5 up. The cell plan is a data usage cap, e.g. 2GB/$25 (ATT). Don't get all butthurt over VZ's squealing now that they have a real smart phone on their network. BTW, I don't care what any carrier tells you. Based on the network as a whole, not spot areas like NYC (What isn't congested in NYC FFS? I hate that place.) there is no congestion problem with VZ or ATT. The issue is all about how to get more money to increase profits and raise the value of the company stock, plain and simple. ATT/VZ aren't there to provide a service, they are there to make money. Makes me long for the days when a "Telephone" was considered a utility, and regulated.[/citation]


Well first i didnt mean it as a direct comparasin i was just trying to make a point. As for a real smart phone well ill leave that to te opinions of others since i hate android phones just a little less then apple and apple is total junk. Obviously data caps and speed tiers are different but the tiering is what i was talking about.
I dont give a crap about att they have no phones i want. And the reason i use verizon is quality of service. The only smart phone i have used that i have really liked out of te storm droid and imagio (iphone) was teh storm. I use average 10mb a month so i doubt personaly ill care for now. But i dont like the idea of data caps. Speed tiers ok but not data caps.
 

JimmiG

Distinguished
Nov 21, 2008
51
0
18,580
[citation][nom]MDillenbeck[/nom]One could easily argue the same thing - someone who streams video on a shared cable internet broadband connection should be equally in violation of abusing the network. After all, the internet was and should always be about sharing text-only documents, like email or imageless pages.[/citation]

There's a difference. You're not giving anything up by using wired Internet at home, putting less strain on the mobile network. Unlike 3G, cable has the capacity to handle many subscribers using lots of bandwidth at the same.

Of course the carriers will have to improve their networks, and I think this is already happening. Meanwhile, there's no reason to abuse the network, ruining the experience for everyone just to prove a point.

Bandwidth is not infinite, it's a limited resource like oil or electricity. It's like driving a SUV to work in the city. Typically american to think you yourself have the right to all the limited resources of the world.
 

everygamer

Distinguished
Aug 1, 2006
144
0
18,630
If they were not getting an extra $30/month for each new smartphone owner I would see this as a big deal. The reality is that smartphone users can bypass the use of text messaging which Verizon and other phone providers were using as a cash cow for years. I now send my text message out via Google Voice and bypass my phone service, and I have dropped my texting plan. So at the end of the day, the technology is changing but Verizon still needs to make nice with its share holders. It is easy for them to yell infrastrcuture ... but I doubt that is the real problem, it is profit margin.
 

dvanholland

Distinguished
Jul 8, 2009
4
0
18,510
dark_knight33 :
One more thing, if (according to ATT) 65% of smart users only use 200MB/mo or less, how is soft-limiting them to that amount going to do anything to improve network congestion? Sounds to me like they just want to further monetize the user who occasionally breaks his/her habits. If they *really* wanted to improve network congestion, they would simply throttle the heaviest users on the network based on their EIN. If you get someone who ditches their home cable/internet package and likes to tether their cell for Hulu at home, that is abusing the network IMO. Those are the ones that you need to rake over the coals. Not the consumer base as a whole. Think people don't do that? : http://www.ipadforums.net/ipad-gen [...] u-wtf.html



Nailed it, sir. Well done.
 

shanky887614

Distinguished
Feb 5, 2010
232
0
18,840
they just want morte money that is all this is about

for example fair use policies are c*** and dont work

when everyone is on the internet all that happens is people are throtled but you arnt usually throttled that low

so in fact they could provide unlimited service if they wanted to but it would bring in less money for them
 

matt87_50

Distinguished
Mar 23, 2009
599
0
18,930
[citation][nom]borisof007[/nom]Hopefully they won't get charged 5 times more on their cell phone bills.[/citation]


why shouldn't they be? if they use 5 times the service, why shouldn't they be charged 5 times as much? if I use 5 times as much electricity as someone else, I'd expect to be charged 5 times what they are. that is what we call Fair.
 
G

Guest

Guest
This is one of the main reasons I refuse to get a newer Smartphone. Sure all the new phones have wonderful features and do amazing things but all of that comes with a cost. Stupid companies are not being very public about researching and developing high bandwidth WIRELESS service. Leads me to believe companies want to rake in the money without giving much back. Take the Galaxy S, I'd have to agree to a two year contract PLUS add the data plan. That means my wireless bill will triple all for services I don't really care about.
 

dragunover

Distinguished
Jun 30, 2008
38
0
18,580
"Verizon is rumored to be moving away from unlimited data plans and towards a tiered system, and with more and more customers purchasing smartphones, it's easy to see why. "
HERP DERP HOW DO I BUSINESS LOL?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.