In a word, no. It is the carrier's responsibility to provide the service they agreed to provide. It is no different than a company selling more widgets than it can produce in a given time. You sold the service when you activated the account/phone. It is not Google/Facebook/Apple fault that carriers wrote and sold poor contracts (ie. unlimited data plans).
...European carriers are blaming the likes of Google, Apple and Facebook for the added pressure. In fact, they're even demanding that the aforementioned three contribute to the cost of network updates to help them handle the extra weight.
I'll digress it'd be nice if they did, then the consumer wouldn't have to shell out so much.
I don't really agree to it on a responsibility level of these businesses. Wireless companies should've been anticipating this coming from the trend in electronics and handheld devices for the last 10+ years and preparing their networks to handle it. While it is a rather large jump in support needed for the networks, assistance being asked for is a polite way of saying "hey, you're getting richer, and we're breaking our backs for you now. What gives?" instead of suing them. I'm sure that'll be next though. Be prepared for the 3 wisemehn (Google, Facebook, and Apple) to be buying up all the failing service providers as "compensation" or at least starting their own services. Google is already on that path.
I disagree with most comments, thinking yes this makes sense cos' companies should pay for the resources they need as a basis of their own business, Google and facebook would not exist if Internet providers did not exist.
and Sony has been subsidising my power bill for years...
are the carriers going to subsidise the electricity companies for all the power their users use in using their computers, smart phones, to get on-line?
or maybe it should be the electricity companies subsidising the data companies, because the electricity company is making lots of money out of people charging their smartphones to go online.
honestly, the stupidest thing I've ever heard...
carriers: if you can't survive on you current stupid 'one fee for all, no matter how much you use' model, perhaps you would consider, I don't know, LOOKING AT WHAT EVERY OTHER UTILLITIY DOES, and setting up a more sensible, realistic pricing scheme.
Most likely providers can't change their service plans. Either they do it all at once or users will shift to someone who is willing to stay cheaper and ignore user complaints. Nobody would pass up such an opportunity.
Their plans are also over the top expensive. They've exhausted their means to mask the exorbitant price. If they add a bit more to the price - the bulk of users will choose the cheaper plan because even if they get exponentially more value for the more expensive plan.
Carriers know what an average user can spend on their mobile plan. And they can't quite provide the service that the user expects for that kind of money.
So a bunch of competitors sat together and couldn't agree on a common strategy to change service plans to aquire the needed revenue for system upgrades. And maybe "price fixing" was mentioned. So they try to blame others.
I believe they know best the futility of their "request". They simply want to point where the problem lies.
A lack of foresight on the carriers part does not mean internet based companies should pay for the services they provide. You don't see Facebook etc subsidising ISP's for data usage across ground based networks. This is basically the carriers spitting their dummy out and crying that consumer needs have changed and they may actually have to leave their comfort zone to accommodate them.
Sounds like they need to revamp their business model, instead of griping about the very reason people are buying expensive phones/contracts from them. You don't see Kleenex asking the porn industry for a supplement.
[citation][nom]BartG[/nom]i dont get it, the more people use the more they pay right... So if they pay more, the networks get more money right? Data costs money, so anything used should cover the expenses, if not, thats a shit business model...[/citation]
They offer (or did offer) unlimited data plans at 60 Euro per month. It's one of the most popular contracts in my area. Unfortunately, it sounds like they didn't realize all those people they sold the contracts to wouldn't limit their Facebook/Google/iTunes time...go figure.
The first company that comes out with a complete pay-for-what-you-use business model that is REASONABLY PRICED will end everyone's complaints about not enough this or too much for that. Yes, I understand these are businesses we are talking about, and they inherently want to make money (loads of money) but making (even significantly) less money per person will still make you more money if you have way more people paying. Stop complaining because you can't provide what people are paying you to provide and just do what you agreed to.