In response to danix, Rogers is known for not giving you what your going to use. You obviously didnt have a data plan with them and therefor had to pay through the nose for a service not on your plan. That being said, the rates arent going to be that great either, but its there for a reason.
- Status
In my corner of Canada there are now 2 data plans from rogers. 1) 5c/kb. The second option is a 7$/month unlimited plan that requires you to accept a 3 year contract (on all of your Rogers products). Upon closer inspection of the TOS for my area (and speaking with a customer service rep. on the phone) it turns out there is a 20$/month per product cancellation fee.
Recently they tried to charge me 77$+tax per month for basic cable tv service. That was their cheapest rate. I don't even have a cable box.
My cellphone bill was 63$ this month. I have an old plan that offers me 250 daytime minutes (of which I used 47). If I was to switch to their new 150 daytime minute play I will pay 5$/month extra.
They are simply infuriating to deal with. My bill has been wrong 9 months in a row now. A couple months ago my bill was unintentionally doubled. That's when I snapped and started canceling my services with them. To make things even better it takes an average of 3 transfers to get a hold of anybody who's able to make sense of their billing system enough to tell me that yes, there was an error and yes they will try and fix it.
The newest irritant in dealing with this cesspool corporation is their "heavily accented initial point of contact customer service department" whom are perpetually "updating their systems" but who try to sell you every service they offer that you don't already have before transferring you to somebody who can "help you with your issue". How they know exactly what services I don't already have when they are "updating their systems" is insulting.
As a matter of fact, it's almost as insulting as their unlimited use cellphone data plan. It is for "On-Device-Only" browsing. They offer no data plans to use your cellphone as a highspeed modem for your laptop. Even with an unlimited data plan you get to pay 5c/kb for that service.
So why is it we don't use technology available in our mobile devices?
I don't know about you... but I'm not rich enough to be lighting Cuban cigars with 100$ bills while I play bumper cars with collection of Bugatti Veyrons for fun, so I certainly can't afford to browse the web with my mobile device.
Recently they tried to charge me 77$+tax per month for basic cable tv service. That was their cheapest rate. I don't even have a cable box.
My cellphone bill was 63$ this month. I have an old plan that offers me 250 daytime minutes (of which I used 47). If I was to switch to their new 150 daytime minute play I will pay 5$/month extra.
They are simply infuriating to deal with. My bill has been wrong 9 months in a row now. A couple months ago my bill was unintentionally doubled. That's when I snapped and started canceling my services with them. To make things even better it takes an average of 3 transfers to get a hold of anybody who's able to make sense of their billing system enough to tell me that yes, there was an error and yes they will try and fix it.
The newest irritant in dealing with this cesspool corporation is their "heavily accented initial point of contact customer service department" whom are perpetually "updating their systems" but who try to sell you every service they offer that you don't already have before transferring you to somebody who can "help you with your issue". How they know exactly what services I don't already have when they are "updating their systems" is insulting.
As a matter of fact, it's almost as insulting as their unlimited use cellphone data plan. It is for "On-Device-Only" browsing. They offer no data plans to use your cellphone as a highspeed modem for your laptop. Even with an unlimited data plan you get to pay 5c/kb for that service.
So why is it we don't use technology available in our mobile devices?
I don't know about you... but I'm not rich enough to be lighting Cuban cigars with 100$ bills while I play bumper cars with collection of Bugatti Veyrons for fun, so I certainly can't afford to browse the web with my mobile device.
Why would I would internet on my telephone? That's as useless as my toaster having internet...give me a break. Only dorks would sit there trying to email/web surf on thir little cell phone. geeks!
Maybe other countries can do more because the companies serving their customers are fewer and have more power, because of crooked government policies which restrict competition. Maybe the way ITT once was---they had good service in the old days, remember? Just got back from Italy, and their cell phone rates are very high. Average use over there may be 200 minutes per phone per month, here in the US the rates allow us to spend an average of 900 minutes per month. Good service because of lack of competition but high rates as a result. Our companies are too small to get things going?????
Maybe other countries can do more because the companies serving their customers are fewer and have more power, because of crooked government policies which restrict competition. Maybe the way ITT once was---they had good service in the old days, remember? Just got back from Italy, and their cell phone rates are very high. Average use over there may be 200 minutes per phone per month, here in the US the rates allow us to spend an average of 900 minutes per month. Good service because of lack of competition but high rates as a result. Our companies are too small to get things going?????
enewmen
Distinguished
- Mar 6, 2005
- 180
- 0
- 18,630
USA cell phone service totally sucks.
I get excellent high-speed Internet service from the 3rd-world for about $20 a month UNLIMITED (1+ mbps). From the rice-fields in Thailand I can get WCDMA, GPS/GPRS. The phones are the same Nokia/Samsung/motorola,etc you can get in the rest of southeast Asia/Europe - n95 for example. The providers are 1-2-GO, AIS, DTAC, orange, etc. AND NO STUPID SERVICE PLANS. You buy the phone at a PHONE STORE (thousands available), then pick a service (the SIM card), then re-fill used minutes at any phone store, 7-11, or online/automated. Most people(there) don't bother with more costly DSL/cable modems. Their PCs get high-speed internet from the cell phones via bluetooth.
Like I said, the States has sub-third world service.
my 2+ cents,.
I get excellent high-speed Internet service from the 3rd-world for about $20 a month UNLIMITED (1+ mbps). From the rice-fields in Thailand I can get WCDMA, GPS/GPRS. The phones are the same Nokia/Samsung/motorola,etc you can get in the rest of southeast Asia/Europe - n95 for example. The providers are 1-2-GO, AIS, DTAC, orange, etc. AND NO STUPID SERVICE PLANS. You buy the phone at a PHONE STORE (thousands available), then pick a service (the SIM card), then re-fill used minutes at any phone store, 7-11, or online/automated. Most people(there) don't bother with more costly DSL/cable modems. Their PCs get high-speed internet from the cell phones via bluetooth.
Like I said, the States has sub-third world service.
my 2+ cents,.
I'd offer one thing that nobody has mentioned yet - the rate of private automobile use in the US. Many other countries are more dependent on transit, which a) runs on fixed routes which are easier to serve with wireless than the US interstate highway system, and b) relives travelers of the obligation of driving the vehicle, giving them more time to use mobile Internet devices.
--One of the problems is that the Japanese and European companies are heavily subsidized by their governments. In the US cellular companies don't receive the RUS, Rural Utilities Service, funding that the land line companies get. This results in less investment in infrastructure. Remember we are still a capitalist country for now while most of the EU is Socalist.--
It seems that all the dead-horse-beating the hardline free marketeers have been doing the last decade or so has some people brainwashed. The wireless carriers in the United States are, by and large, the land line companies. I guarantee that Verizon or AT&T receive more gov't funding in gross than any EU or Japanese carrier. There are only two or three major backbone providers left in the US - all the smaller ones have been absorbed by the AT&T or the Verizon behemoths. Someone mentioned regulatory fines would likely be in the millions if these companies were subjected to EU laws - when their antitrust laws are factored in, it'd be more like TRILLIONS in fines. Those of you with Verizon: go look at the disclaimers on your plans. if you don't have the unlimited data plan, you're probably getting zapped at $1.99 /MB. The evil part is that the contract specifically states that this includes ADVERTISING, which the carrier sells [another profit source, of course] out to various "strategic partners." What they don't tell you is that the carrier has absolute control over the size of the ads - so you may load a text only page, like craigslist, at 80 kb usage. But Vz pushes three ads to you in the process, all weighing in at 950kb or more. Talk about double dipping.
Bottom line is this: until we elect representatives willing to grind all exploitative industries into the ground with crushing tax increases, these corporations will continue to screw the people. period.
It seems that all the dead-horse-beating the hardline free marketeers have been doing the last decade or so has some people brainwashed. The wireless carriers in the United States are, by and large, the land line companies. I guarantee that Verizon or AT&T receive more gov't funding in gross than any EU or Japanese carrier. There are only two or three major backbone providers left in the US - all the smaller ones have been absorbed by the AT&T or the Verizon behemoths. Someone mentioned regulatory fines would likely be in the millions if these companies were subjected to EU laws - when their antitrust laws are factored in, it'd be more like TRILLIONS in fines. Those of you with Verizon: go look at the disclaimers on your plans. if you don't have the unlimited data plan, you're probably getting zapped at $1.99 /MB. The evil part is that the contract specifically states that this includes ADVERTISING, which the carrier sells [another profit source, of course] out to various "strategic partners." What they don't tell you is that the carrier has absolute control over the size of the ads - so you may load a text only page, like craigslist, at 80 kb usage. But Vz pushes three ads to you in the process, all weighing in at 950kb or more. Talk about double dipping.
Bottom line is this: until we elect representatives willing to grind all exploitative industries into the ground with crushing tax increases, these corporations will continue to screw the people. period.
The reason is far more simple: Most Americans don't want to be connected to the internet 24/7. Personally, I would not pay for mobile internet, even it was just as good as the internet on my desktop. I have a mobile phone to call people. Thats all I need it for. I don't want to check my e-mail away from the office, I'm not working. I'm not the only one that feels this way either. I'm on the net all day at work, I have it at home. I happen to enjoy getting away from it.
Manufacturers have been trying to get Americans to adopt mobile internet for a while. We're not taking it in mass numbers. There just isn't a solid market for it.
Manufacturers have been trying to get Americans to adopt mobile internet for a while. We're not taking it in mass numbers. There just isn't a solid market for it.
The guy who wrote this article didn't read the charts too well. Yeah, America is below average, but when the top performer in internet usage only yields 20%, it says something about mobile internet entirely. Email is another story, but if you take Japan out of the picture (who notably does very little texting anymore consequently), they're actually average with the rest of the western world. It's not just the providers, it's the culture.
Us Capitalist/White Supremacist/Rednecks aren't ready for cell phone internet...we barely use landlines. I communicate locally with a series of obnoxious noises from the rusted out muffler of my pickup truck.
I have recently moved to the US from Europe and I have to say that I was shocked by the high rates charged here for cellphone service.
In Europe my family used to pay ~13$/month for cellphones (+5 $ for my internet connection) whereas here we pay 105$. Pretty big difference if you ask me. It is true that in Europe we only got 60 minutes/month/phone and here we get something like 2000 minutes/month but who needs that anyway? Sure we'd talk more than 60 mins/month in europe but whatever was over that would be charged at a rate of 1 cent/minute. NO PROBLEM.
We don't talk that much. What I really find disturbing is the fact that AT&T charges you for the text messages you receive and as well as your voicemail.....Not a big problem if I were to receive such messages only from people I know. But what really ticks me off is the fact that my phone number has been assigned to someone in the past and I keep getting messages from people I never heard of before (like last week the police called to tell me my dad died, wrong number) and a lot of commercial spam text messages for which I HAVE TO PAY FOR!? What is this?
Furthermore the signal quality with AT&T is horrible. In europe I would never have trouble understanding other people due to signal quality but here I get static on the line very often. With the poor signal quality I'm getting I honestly doubt it that AT&T would be able to provide a stable internet connection.
I for one would be ready to fork out even more $$ for an internet connection on my smartphone (if any phone company would be able to provide it) but the thing is that in the US, as far as I can tell, you have to use the phone provided by the company for you which is a shame because I have a Nokia 7710 which i'm only using for games and radio right now. Such a shame.
In Europe my family used to pay ~13$/month for cellphones (+5 $ for my internet connection) whereas here we pay 105$. Pretty big difference if you ask me. It is true that in Europe we only got 60 minutes/month/phone and here we get something like 2000 minutes/month but who needs that anyway? Sure we'd talk more than 60 mins/month in europe but whatever was over that would be charged at a rate of 1 cent/minute. NO PROBLEM.
We don't talk that much. What I really find disturbing is the fact that AT&T charges you for the text messages you receive and as well as your voicemail.....Not a big problem if I were to receive such messages only from people I know. But what really ticks me off is the fact that my phone number has been assigned to someone in the past and I keep getting messages from people I never heard of before (like last week the police called to tell me my dad died, wrong number) and a lot of commercial spam text messages for which I HAVE TO PAY FOR!? What is this?
Furthermore the signal quality with AT&T is horrible. In europe I would never have trouble understanding other people due to signal quality but here I get static on the line very often. With the poor signal quality I'm getting I honestly doubt it that AT&T would be able to provide a stable internet connection.
I for one would be ready to fork out even more $$ for an internet connection on my smartphone (if any phone company would be able to provide it) but the thing is that in the US, as far as I can tell, you have to use the phone provided by the company for you which is a shame because I have a Nokia 7710 which i'm only using for games and radio right now. Such a shame.
The FCC needs to transition the entire RF Spectrum into unrestricted WiFi internet access.
The current method (which is really just a holdover of the past before there was an internet) of dividing up the spectrum between competing bidders for a variety of specific services rather than creating a cohesive collective Ultra Wide Band network is stunting the massive communications potential of the RF Spectrum.
The cell phone companies managed to pull off an incredible coup, convincing people to pay twice as much as they use to to make phone calls, pay fees for sending tiny data packets called SMS text messages, and pay as much for internet as their home broadband connection.
They managed to convince users to pay for individual services rather than a single broadband connection that the end user could then do whatever they wanted with it.
We need to demand that the FCC in concert with the IEEE (creators of the wifi standards) engineer an Ultra Wide Band network specification using the entire RF spectrum.
The FCC can pro-ratedly buy back the spectrum that the FCC has licensed out and been paid for and then the communications and backbone providers can start putting up towers for Ultra Wide Band.
Ultra Wide Band is inevitable, eventually we will transition our communications system to it, the question is how long is it gonna take?
With the lack of technologically minded politicians in Washington D.C. along with the moneyed interests who benefit from the current environment, probably another 50 years.
The only thing preventing this from happening in the next 5-10 years is the political will and the demand from U.S. citizens to have a truly content neutral open access broadband network running over the People's Airwaves.
The current method (which is really just a holdover of the past before there was an internet) of dividing up the spectrum between competing bidders for a variety of specific services rather than creating a cohesive collective Ultra Wide Band network is stunting the massive communications potential of the RF Spectrum.
The cell phone companies managed to pull off an incredible coup, convincing people to pay twice as much as they use to to make phone calls, pay fees for sending tiny data packets called SMS text messages, and pay as much for internet as their home broadband connection.
They managed to convince users to pay for individual services rather than a single broadband connection that the end user could then do whatever they wanted with it.
We need to demand that the FCC in concert with the IEEE (creators of the wifi standards) engineer an Ultra Wide Band network specification using the entire RF spectrum.
The FCC can pro-ratedly buy back the spectrum that the FCC has licensed out and been paid for and then the communications and backbone providers can start putting up towers for Ultra Wide Band.
Ultra Wide Band is inevitable, eventually we will transition our communications system to it, the question is how long is it gonna take?
With the lack of technologically minded politicians in Washington D.C. along with the moneyed interests who benefit from the current environment, probably another 50 years.
The only thing preventing this from happening in the next 5-10 years is the political will and the demand from U.S. citizens to have a truly content neutral open access broadband network running over the People's Airwaves.
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question Google is quite upset with me, and I think I know why but need help
- Started by ulao
- Replies: 11
-
Question Best SSD Upgrade Options and Installation Tips for MacBook Pro
- Started by muhammadali3908
- Replies: 1
-
Solved! What is causing..my New high end (4090 Gpu) laptop, to crash sudden!...plz help
- Started by AsusRogstrix 16 RTX4090!
- Replies: 20
-
-
Question Upgrading HP Pavilion Notebook iCore 3 6100U
- Started by Majordad10
- Replies: 9
Facebook
Twitter