I have cut the cord. How liberating! Now 100% wireless.

[Joelist]

Actually that page specifically says that it is not throttling. It also states that it does not apply to LTE and only applies to the top 5% of 3G users when they are connecting to a congested cell site. Throttling is done to a user at all times.

 

[Joelist]

So how much data do you use in a month right now?

 

[Overmind One]

Actually that page specifically says that it is not throttling. It also states that it does not apply to LTE and only applies to the top 5% of 3G users when they are connecting to a congested cell site. Throttling is done to a user at all times.

Semantics. Using software to reduce the flow of data is THROTTLING. The same software which is used to throttle is the same software which is used to "optimize" on Verizon. The verbose excuses they have published are irrelevant. The act of implementing controlled data throughput is throttling no matter what they call it.

 

[Joelist]

It also says they do not do it with LTE. It is basically to curb abusive 3G users who were causing everyone in really heavy areas to have slower speeds by hogging up the whole pipe.

 

[Overmind One]

It also says they do not do it with LTE. It is basically to curb abusive 3G users who were causing everyone in really heavy areas to have slower speeds by hogging up the whole pipe.

Oh, I understand what its for and why they are doing it. Its the fact that they are saying that what they are doing is not throttling. Companies like these carriers use buzz words like "unlimited" and "free" to draw in customers, only to demonstrate clearly that NOTHING is free and their "unlimited" service has limits. That is dishonest and sleazy and in keeping with how they do business and how they have been doing business since the post-monopoly days of AT&T. Its sleazy and wrong.

I am NOT on their side. They are ripping off customers.

Better explanation on CNET:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-5...erizon-also-throttles-unlimited-data-service/

"Like AT&T did initially with its policy, Verizon also targets the top 5 percent of the heaviest data users. But the company uses network intelligence to only slow down those heavy data users when the network is actually congested.The way it works is that if you use more than 2GB of data per month, Verizon is likely to identify you as being in the top 5 percent of data users. Once you've been identified as a heavy data user, when the cell site you are in gets congested, Verizon will slow down your access until the network is no longer so crowded."

2GB? Really? That is equivalent to two HD movies streamed from Netflix per month. Hardly a "heavy user".

 

[Joelist]

Actually the CNET article confirms what I said. They only do it on 3G not LTE and they only do it when identified "top 5%" users are on a hub that at that time is very congested. Plus as soon as the hub slows down a bit or they move to a slower one they stop it. AT&T is the one doing it in a really sleazy way as they bust you if you go over their cap for the rest of the month.

 

[Bluce Ree]

Actually the CNET article confirms what I said. They only do it on 3G not LTE and they only do it when identified "top 5%" users are on a hub that at that time is very congested. Plus as soon as the hub slows down a bit or they move to a slower one they stop it. AT&T is the one doing it in a really sleazy way as they bust you if you go over their cap for the rest of the month.

AT&T also has no clear throttling policy. Their throttling is arbitrary and has solicited some very nasty, angry words from disgruntled users on various forums. One guy was being throttled consistently at 250 MB while another one was getting away with high-speed up to 3 GB.

 

[Overmind One]

Actually the CNET article confirms what I said. They only do it on 3G not LTE and they only do it when identified "top 5%" users are on a hub that at that time is very congested. Plus as soon as the hub slows down a bit or they move to a slower one they stop it. AT&T is the one doing it in a really sleazy way as they bust you if you go over their cap for the rest of the month.

This is what gets me, Joelist...bandwidth is VERY cheap today. VERY cheap. The carriers could easily expand the bandwidth to accomodate customers. Instead, they are creating tiered plans to replace their failed "pay for minutes" model which is now irrelevant. They are trying to maintain healthy profit margins, not provide the best service. If you knew how the infrastructure was laid out you would see this as I do. The reality of throttling is that it creates a conduit for profits. Texting, for instance, costs fractions of a cent to send and receive. However some wireless carriers charge up to 20 cents to text. Calls to information, $1.20. Whats more, more than 90% of the carriers do not provide a way to monitor data usage so that users will go over and have to pay overage charges.

Joe, do you REALLY believe that your wireless carrier is your advocate and is TRULY interested in providing you the best service? If you do, you are naive. Their job is to give you the most expensive service you can handle. If you know somebody working in the telecom industry, have a candid conversation with them and you will get an earful for sure. I have to work with them regularly, and some of the stuff I hear is amazing.

Put it this way...if they wanted to be truly competitive, they would not need 2-year contracts.

 

[Overmind One]

AT&T also has no clear throttling policy. Their throttling is arbitrary and has solicited some very nasty, angry words from disgruntled users on various forums. One guy was being throttled consistently at 250 MB while another one was getting away with high-speed up to 3 GB.

At least AT&T will notify you that you have been throttled. Verizon does not.

 

[Joelist]

Verizon isn't throttling in the usual sense of the word. Remember the way they do it:

1) 3G ONLY. They do not do it at all on LTE.

2) Only top 5% 3G users and only if they are on a cellular hub that at that moment is experiencing very heavy traffic.

3) It automatically stops when the traffic lessens or the user goes to a lighter trafficked hub.

AT&T on the other hand out and out throttles the user on all connections and does it through the end of the billing period. The two are completely different and Verizon's way is FAR less intrusive.

 

[Overmind One]

Verizon isn't throttling in the usual sense of the word. Remember the way they do it:

1) 3G ONLY. They do not do it at all on LTE.

2) Only top 5% 3G users and only if they are on a cellular hub that at that moment is experiencing very heavy traffic.

3) It automatically stops when the traffic lessens or the user goes to a lighter trafficked hub.

AT&T on the other hand out and out throttles the user on all connections and does it through the end of the billing period. The two are completely different and Verizon's way is FAR less intrusive.

Definition of UNLIMITED

1
: lacking any controls : unrestricted <unlimited access>

2
: boundless, infinite <unlimited possibilities>

3
: not bounded by exceptions : undefined <the unlimited and unconditional surrender of the enemy — Sir Winston Churchill>
— un·lim·it·ed·ly adverb

Throttling, no matter "how they do it" means that the service is NOT "unlimited" which is my entire point of contention.

 

[Joelist]

As to bandwidth being cheap, not really. Remember that the wireless carrier in order to expand bandwidth in a given area (especially on an old tech like EVDO which is what their 3G is on) has to replace equipment on towers. That equipment isn't cheap and also the question arises of why they should be upgrading obsolete equipment instead of implementing the newer, better stuff - which is what Verizon is doing. Their LTE is VERY fast and has a much larger bandwidth pool than the old 3G plus their LTE rollout is far larger than anyone else's. It is also fully LTE Advanced ready so that when handsets using it are out they will be able to roll them out smoothly.

I don't know what Sprint plans but I think their eventual goal is similar. Verizon's plan is definitely to sunset CDMA and 3G in the next couple of years and have their phones all be LTE for data and VoLTE and/or SVLTE for the voice component.

 

[shavedape]

This is what gets me, Joelist...bandwidth is VERY cheap today. VERY cheap. The carriers could easily expand the bandwidth to accomodate customers. Instead, they are creating tiered plans to replace their failed "pay for minutes" model which is now irrelevant. They are trying to maintain healthy profit margins, not provide the best service. If you knew how the infrastructure was laid out you would see this as I do. The reality of throttling is that it creates a conduit for profits. Texting, for instance, costs fractions of a cent to send and receive. However some wireless carriers charge up to 20 cents to text. Calls to information, $1.20. Whats more, more than 90% of the carriers do not provide a way to monitor data usage so that users will go over and have to pay overage charges.

Joe, do you REALLY believe that your wireless carrier is your advocate and is TRULY interested in providing you the best service? If you do, you are naive. Their job is to give you the most expensive service you can handle. If you know somebody working in the telecom industry, have a candid conversation with them and you will get an earful for sure. I have to work with them regularly, and some of the stuff I hear is amazing.

Put it this way...if they wanted to be truly competitive, they would not need 2-year contracts.

I would definitely agree with this. The evidence is plain to see. Shame so many people are just sheep when it comes to this stuff. We all know texting is a rip off but not enough people pay attention to the fact that throttling of data services is another scam. I sometimes use MiFi and the imposed limits on usage are laughable. I can have up to 5 people on that hotspot at a time but God forbid we go over the limit, then the charges really kick in. How lame. Just charge one fee for unlimited usage. If you don't want users downloading movies and heavy data streams that's fine, but having the data limits set so low that it's easy to go over them innocently is a scam pure and simple.

 

[Joelist]

Definition of UNLIMITED

1
: lacking any controls : unrestricted <unlimited access>

2
: boundless, infinite <unlimited possibilities>

3
: not bounded by exceptions : undefined <the unlimited and unconditional surrender of the enemy — Sir Winston Churchill>
— un·lim·it·ed·ly adverb

Throttling, no matter "how they do it" means that the service is NOT "unlimited" which is my entire point of contention.

Where is the "limit"? The user is still getting their data at the same price and it does not cut off or stop. All that is happening is instead of everyone in a very high traffic hub experiencing slowdowns they are targeting the high users first. But even then their data does not stop - the performance simply temporarily slows down until either the hub traffic lightens or they go to a lighter trafficked hub.

 

[Overmind One]

As to bandwidth being cheap, not really. Remember that the wireless carrier in order to expand bandwidth in a given area (especially on an old tech like EVDO which is what their 3G is on) has to replace equipment on towers. That equipment isn't cheap and also the question arises of why they should be upgrading obsolete equipment instead of implementing the newer, better stuff - which is what Verizon is doing. Their LTE is VERY fast and has a much larger bandwidth pool than the old 3G plus their LTE rollout is far larger than anyone else's. It is also fully LTE Advanced ready so that when handsets using it are out they will be able to roll them out smoothly.

Is this a guess, Joelist? Where did you get this information? Bandwidth is VERY cheap. The name for all of the unused bandwidth is "overcapacity". And you are only talking about LTE when there is still 4G, 3G and 2G and WAP. Verizon already has the best national coverage in 3G. So, if multi-band phones like most Android phones can use 2G, 3G and 4G, there is no need to throttle. The carriers can simply provide unlimited service on all three bands and when one is weak it automatically switches to another band.

I don't know what Sprint plans but I think their eventual goal is similar. Verizon's plan is definitely to sunset CDMA and 3G in the next couple of years and have their phones all be LTE for data and VoLTE and/or SVLTE for the voice component.

I am not married to Sprint, except by contract. My point is that the mobile carriers in general are terrified at the prospect of top end growth finally coming to a close. LTE is as far as they need to go and there is nothing after that. No services which exist will need more than that. What's more is that phone manufacturers will continue to grow because people get bored with their phones. But the carriers dont have much to offer after LTE. They are making their money on overages and fees, and that is going to go away when smaller companies can offer unlimited LTE. My brief experience with LTE on a test device even outperformed wired FiOS. :smile-new:

 

[Overmind One]

Where is the "limit"? The user is still getting their data at the same price and it does not cut off or stop. All that is happening is instead of everyone in a very high traffic hub experiencing slowdowns they are targeting the high users first. But even then their data does not stop - the performance simply temporarily slows down until either the hub traffic lightens or they go to a lighter trafficked hub.

If Verizon is reducing or otherwise governing data usage under ANY circumstance, that is throttling no matter how you want to look at it. You are illustrating the circumstances, but the reality is the same. Limits are being imposed on "unlimited" services. How come you don't see that?

 

[Overmind One]

Recommended reading:

http://mobileopportunity.blogspot.com/2011/06/truth-about-wireless-bandwidth-crisis.html



http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105...-plans-has-helped-make-u.s-carriers-billions/

Killing off their unlimited data plans in recent years hasn't made U.S. wireless carriers very popular in certain circles, but it has helped them make a lot of money off your mobile-data habit.
The New York Times reported this week that in the last quarter alone, AT&T reported more than $6.1 billion in revenues from mobile-data plans, while Verizon took in $6.6 billion. Those numbers also reveal significant growth of as much as 20 percent on an annual basis, despite the fact that carriers are adding customers at a slower pace now that most people already have a smartphone. That's because more people are gobbling up more wireless data, and they're also paying more for it as Verizon and AT&T have stopped offering unlimited data to new customers in favor of a variety of tiered pricing plans and overage charges that all add up -- literally -- to billions for the carriers and their shareholders.

https://community.verizonwireless.com/thread/725847

Excerpt:

I'm the bad guy... at least according to Verizon's throttling policy for the remaining "unlimited" (haha!) data customers utilizing 3G. And yes, it is throttling, "network optimization" doublespeak aside; a better term might be "bottom line optimization." I understand the desire to not end up in the same situation that ATT/Cingular did, whom I left for Verizon because their connectivity became atrocious. This action, however, is a step backward, disrecpectful of their most active users, and demonstrates a glaring lack of vision with regards to the ever-blossoming world of mobile data connectivity. I'm technically knowledgeable and understand that 10 million users all maxing out their connections 24/7 is unsustainable with existing architecture, I get it, but that's not what's happening. This action is nothing more than a means of forcing the remaining "unlimited" (again hah!) data users off of these grandfathered plans and onto the new tiered rate structure and ultimately is about $$$ and not equal opportunity bandwidth allocation. And if bandwidth is at that much of a premium, then it's Verizon's fault for not appropriately scaling up to accomodate the incredible increase in data users driven by it's own push towards smartphones for everyone and the adoption of the iphone; not the fault of users that use more data than the average person.

If carriers want to sell me a cellular internet plan with limits over 2GB/month and state it as such, that is fine. But to sell me an "unlimited" plan which actually does have limits is dishonest and sleazy.

 

[Overmind One]

I would definitely agree with this. The evidence is plain to see. Shame so many people are just sheep when it comes to this stuff. We all know texting is a rip off but not enough people pay attention to the fact that throttling of data services is another scam. I sometimes use MiFi and the imposed limits on usage are laughable. I can have up to 5 people on that hotspot at a time but God forbid we go over the limit, then the charges really kick in. How lame. Just charge one fee for unlimited usage. If you don't want users downloading movies and heavy data streams that's fine, but having the data limits set so low that it's easy to go over them innocently is a scam pure and simple.

EXACTLY. When Sprint capped my hotspot usage on my "unlimited" plan, they used semantics to make a case for the internet only being unlimited on the phone. But if my data is unlimited, why cant I use my phone to provide internet to another device? The data usage is the same. I decided to use my device in root mode to get around that limit but Sprint sent out an update to modify Android to lock use of the built in router (which does not belong to Sprint, and is in violation of the Android agreement). Right now, they are able to get away with it but not for long. Developers can write their own router software.

Then there is monitoring. Sprint does not offer an easy way to check hotspot data usage. You can EASILY go over the limit and be charged exorbitant fees for overages. Anybody who thinks that any carrier is their friend is naive. Those smiling teens in the stores are friendly and they remember your names and ask how you are, but they are SUPPOSED to be that way. They are not the ones making your bills or watching out for your charges. They are there to SELL and nothing more. Half the time they cant tell you anything about your contract. But they sure can sell you phones. They will start at the top end and move down only if they see they don't have an easy sell.

 

[Tropicana]

Definition of UNLIMITED

1
: lacking any controls : unrestricted <unlimited access>

2
: boundless, infinite <unlimited possibilities>

3
: not bounded by exceptions : undefined <the unlimited and unconditional surrender of the enemy — Sir Winston Churchill>
— un·lim·it·ed·ly adverb

Throttling, no matter "how they do it" means that the service is NOT "unlimited" which is my entire point of contention.

Many broadband providers offer "unlimited" broadband however it's all subjected to fair use policy. If they can see you are downloading major GBs, they will throttle your speed in most cases, as outlined in the terms and conditions. That's what they do here, so it's all about being sensible.

 

[Overmind One]

Many broadband providers offer "unlimited" broadband however it's all subjected to fair use policy. If they can see you are downloading major GBs, they will throttle your speed in most cases, as outlined in the terms and conditions. That's what they do here, so it's all about being sensible.

I totally get this. But the point is the word "unlimited". Something is either unlimited or it is not. SAYING something is unlimited, and it having limits is dishonest. No other way to say it. Even if they said "Almost Unlimited" would be more honest, but then customers wouldn't get very excited about it, right? Then there are users who feel that people using more than 5GB a month are "abusing" their UNLIMITED service. Really? That seems ludicrous to me. If I go into a restaurant which is offering "all you can eat", then I get kicked out for eating "too much", is that right? :icon_rolleyes: Carriers should know that a certain percentage of users are going to REALLY use their unlimited service. If they are unprepared for that, then they should not offer what they cannot provide.

This is really big with me. I eat at restaurants often, and recently I went into the humble Denny's for breakfast. They no longer offer my favorite breakfast which is the Meat Lovers Scramble. The reason? "Too much" meat and too small of a price. So, I told them I wanted them to make me one and I would just pay the price whatever it would be. They refused. Huh? They said it was "not on the menu" and could not determine the price. So, I simply ordered a side of sausage, three eggs scrambled, a slice of ham and a side of bacon and then threw it all together to make my breakfast (which is what the meat lovers scramble is). But I noticed that the sausages were smaller, the bacon strips much smaller, and somehow they made three eggs look like one egg. WTH? The portions of everything, including grapefruit juice, is at least 1/3 smaller than before. When I asked why, they claimed that they were helping health conscious people by having "reduced portions". I call BULLSHIT! Its purely a profit-making change.

This is getting worse and worse, and the worst part of it is that customers are not complaining or saying anything about it.