Verizon Confirms Plan To Switch Away From Unlimited Data Plans 207
loafula writes "Looks like Verizon is going the way of AT&T by not offering new unlimited data plans and switching to a tiered-only plan within six months. Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg said the new plans would be different from what AT&T offers, but didn't provide further details. 'We're not sure we agree yet with how they valued the data.' Everybody take a good look at your contracts; this will be a nice opportunity to jump ship without the hefty fee."
Come on... (Score:2, Insightful)
...I have no problem with tiered pricing (I don't like it, but I accept that it was inevitable)...but what's with the huge gap, Verizon? I can get either 200 megs, or 2 GIGS????
What I would rather see:
200 megs
500 megs
1 gig
2 gigs
Re: (Score:2)
Meant to add an "etc" on the end of that....
Re:Come on... (Score:5, Funny)
Huh?
If your /etc directory is 2 gigs, I think you're doing something wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Huh?
If your /etc directory is 2 gigs, I think you're doing something wrong.
maybe he thought /etc is where he was supposed to put miscellaneous files.
Kinda like my friend who set up my box and /usr/myname
1). forgot to include PATA support in the custom kernel, as a result my drive ran about 1-2MB/s
2). put my user directory in
made me chuckle
Re: (Score:2)
That's AT&T's tiered policy. Verizon hasn't announced their tiered pricing structure yet.
Re: (Score:2)
That's AT&T's tiered policy.
Not really. AT&T gives you these choices:
200MB ($15)
400MB ($30) (by going over your 200 and getting another 200)
-
2GB ($25)
3GB ($35) (by going over 2GB and getting another 1GB)
4GB ($45) (same)
5GB ($55) (same)
Not only is there a rather absurd gap between 400MB and 2GB, but 400MB is more expensive than 2GB!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Come on... (Score:5, Informative)
Not to brag or anything, but damn that's expensive. Here in northern europe, the prices are roughly as follows:
4,90 euros = 6,6 dollars for unlimted data with a maxium speed of 321 kbit/s
9,90 euros = 13,2 dollars for unlimited data with a maxium speed of 1 Mbit/s
14,90 euros = 20,1 dollars for unlimited data with a maxium speed of 15 Mbit/s (with HSPA)
Now, I understand that most mobile usres don't really have the need for unlimited data if they only browse the net and read emails, but it boggles my mind how the cheapest packet for merely 200 megs is twice the price of the cheapest unlimited packet here. Wtf?
Re: (Score:2)
It's simple really: High demand + corporate greed = exorbitant prices.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nit picking, I know...but you don't say "We offer tiered data plans! Get the one that fits your needs!" and then offer only two options. That is literally one option enough to add an "s" on the end of "plans".
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, that's precisely the meaning of "giving the customer choice". Take the worst of all possible options, segment it and get rid of all other options.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yep, that's precisely the meaning of "giving the customer choice". Take the worst of all possible options, segment it and get rid of all other options.
That's true, but only because marketing Newspeak is so thoroughly tolerated.
Re: (Score:2)
So what's the deal? 200mb is enough for people that don't use the web much. But anyone that does daily work on their phone would nearly have to get the 2gb plan for fear of going over and getting gouged. This really is price gouging.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Exactly. I generally use between 300-350 megs per month. The highest I've ever gone was 450 megs. This means, just like described, I'd be forced to go with the 2 gig plan, even though I never come anywhere even close to that much data usage on my phone.
Re: (Score:2)
I plan to just use more data. Or rather, I would, if I got a decent signal everywhere. No network seems to work well where I live, although AT&T seems better (FSVO) than most.
Re: (Score:2)
What's the surprise? Cell providers have been doing this for years. I have to have a 450 minute per month plan to even get a data plan, and I rarely go over two hours in a month.
Give me a 120 min talk time/500Mb Data/250 SMS plan for $40!
Re: (Score:2)
For the fools who believe they will not use more then 200mb.
Then the overage charges kick in and the extra dollars roll in.
I used to make the same mistakes with voice plans constantly. Finally, I decided it would be more economical if I went with a very large plan and just gave them cash up front. The illusion of savings in a lower tiered plan just need to be smashed to bits to see the light.
Re: (Score:2)
You can pretty easily look at your current usage and see how much you will use. My billing cycle ends in a week,and I've used 99MB. It's probably worth it to me to just get the 200MB plan when it comes out.
Of course, if they change my contract, I'll get a new phone while I'm at it.
Re: (Score:2)
Be careful. The more capable phone you have, the more data you may use... I had an iPhone 3G, then a 3GS and I used roughly 300Mb/month. When I got my Droid I went up to ~450Mb average. Now that I've got a Droid X, I'm up to 650Mb this month...
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting. My usage actually went down going from an iPhone 3G to a Droid. I think it's because once the shiny wore off from getting a smartphone, my real usage patterns emerged. Frankly, I think the Droid is barely a step up from the 3G.
I'd be going to a Fascinate or an Incredible, but frankly, I think my preference would be to keep my unlimited data and my Droid, but if they breach the contract, I'm going to take advantage of it--just like I'm sure they'd charge me a few hundred if I decided to cance
Re: (Score:2)
You might consider that you can't actually control data usage with the default settings provided by the stock firmware (without going into "airplane mode" on the Droid, for example), so monthly data usage for a phone is not relevant to your usage needs and quite irrelevant to the 'capabilities' of the phone. Insist on better control at the user level of data usage (as well as a better way to monitor usage data) and you might find that your data needs are much more modest than the default configuration of t
Re: (Score:2)
That'd be the sensible thing to do, but they're grubbing for money- gotta keep profits up, ever up, you know. Never mind that you're in a sagging economy or any silly detail like that.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you mean granular?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Did you mean granular?"
Naw, he meant glandular, as in, "Verizon wants to get you by the glands...."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're correct; if you go over your 200MB, you get charged another $15 for another 200MB.
So instead of paying $25 for 2GB, you're paying $30 for 400MB. Yes, AT&T is being quite generous by not charging overages... *eye roll*
My SO and I keep our data counts down by using WiFi wherever we can
I only dropped from the old $30 "unlimited" (read: 5GB) plan to the $15 200MB plan because they added wifi access points for our mobile devices at work, so generally the only time I'm out of wifi range is during my commute.
I'm still super-nervous about going over the 200MB though, b
Re: (Score:2)
You can, but it starts a new billing cycle at the time of change. New 30 days, new limit, new charge.
So make sure you get close to the 200MB mark before "upgrading".
Signed,
Someone who kept their "unlimited" plan and will keep it as long as possible.
P.S. Going over limit on unlimited doesn't cut you off, they just send you an email advising you to scale back or risk getting dumped.
Re: (Score:2)
You can, but it starts a new billing cycle at the time of change. New 30 days, new limit, new charge.
When I went from Unlimited to 200MB, it didn't start a new 30-day billing cycle, it just prorated things. The charges, anyway, I'm not really sure about the data.
Re:Come on... (Score:5, Insightful)
What's wrong with something simple like bill=roundup(GBUsedInMonth)*$5 or something like that?
The thing I don't like about cell plans is that they're designed to make you pay for average use based entirely on peak use, by putting absolutely hideous fees on going even the slightest bit over what you paid for.
Imagine if your electricity bill was $100/month for 0-1000kWh, plus $5/kWh over. The next plan would be $200 for 0-2000kWh. If you own an air conditioner you'll be paying $200/month in the winter if you don't want a $5000 bill for three months in the summer.
There simply isn't enough competition in cell phone providers, so more regulation is necessary to make things fair for consumers. There should be a monthly billing fee to cover the fixed costs, and then everything else should be pay-as-you-use, with customer-specified maximums (no surprise $5k bills).
There is NO other industry that is as customer-unfriendly as the cell phone industry. You get better customer service at the local loan shark.
Re: (Score:2)
Electric companies already do this, its called Time of Use [srpnet.com]
Re:Come on... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't have a problem with Time of Use - it makes sense since it allows the consumer to structure their demand in a way that helps the actual infrastructure and save money while doing it (or pay more). It actually reflects the REAL cost of providing the service.
Likewise, I have no problems with peak vs off-peak pricing on trains or whatever. The system has to be built to handle peak loads, and so usage that increases peak usage should be more expensive than off-peak usage.
So, if the cell plan charges more between 9AM and 5PM M-F or whatever, I'm fine with that. It is only fair.
What I don't like is pricing schemes where light users have to pay big prices, or medium users have to pay for heavy use or risk getting socked with massive fees, etc.
I once got stuck with a text message bill from my kids use of their phones that would have paid for unlimited texting for a year. The issue was confusion on their part over what was in-network vs out-of-network. The problem was that it is often impossible to spot these kinds of problems before getting stuck with a bill, and if it is possible it usually involves paying even more money (paying money NOT to get a service you don't want - sounds like of like a "service" sold by the mafia), or watching my account daily online or something.
Or how about getting charged when other people send you text messages? If you have teenagers you are almost compelled to buy a texting plan if you don't want to pay a fortune for texts sent by somebody else...
Bottom line is the whole system is one big scam. The occasional reform is really just instituting something that should have been there in the first place. We don't need minor reforms - we need an overhaul...
Re:Come on... (Score:5, Informative)
Nothing wrong with that, except that it would reduce the company's income. You see, having a tiered account is a beatiful system where each customer gets screwed in their own unique way! Unless you are using exactly 200MB, you will pay extra. If you use less than 200MB, then you have paid for some bandwidth and didn't use it. If you go over 200MB, then you pay exorbitant extra fees for every MB. It's perfect. If everyone actually paid a fair price for what they used, Verizon would make a lot less money (same applies to cell phone minute plans, btw).
Also, it is fair to point out that unlike electricity, bandwidth usage does not have much of a cost - the infrastructure is everything. If the networks were completely unused, the savings in maintenance would be negigible.
Re: (Score:2)
And what about folks who want more than that?
Re: (Score:2)
Addressed that. [slashdot.org]
how about no blocks just $0.01 per MB (Score:2)
how about no blocks just $0.01 per MB or big blocks with rollover.
Re:Come on... (Score:4, Interesting)
They can do tiers the same way that (most - at least in the US) ISP's do - you base tiers on bandwidth (which inherently caps data usage). If you want the $15 a month data plan, you get say 75 KB/s, $25 a month will get you 150 KB/s, $35 gets you 300 KB/s, etc. It's fully workable, keeps people from ending up with no data / insane extra fees, and allows the phone companies to not use as much bandwidth.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless that's per day, it's not nearly enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The DSL branches of Verizon (I'm on business DSL - was previously on residential DSL - and have been a VZ DSL customer for 7 years) have tiered service based on *speed*. I think that's reasonable - pay for performance (there is, I think, one tier higher than mine). Tiered based on *usage*, well, that's a bit different when it really doesn't cost that much more to fling a few gigs over the wire than a few K.
-uso.
You know the consumer my actually win (Score:5, Insightful)
While having Unlimited seems nice. For average usage we actually use a lot less then we think we will need.
On my phone I use about 200MB per month and I use my phone quite regularly. However I am on Wi-Fi for most of the time And if I am out of Wi-Fi Range Then is usually because I am driving and not really using my phone. So for people who use the phone for normal stuff it is actually probably a better deal, But people don't think it is because it is metered but they are probably saving money as a tradeoff of having the same bill every month
Re: (Score:2)
On my phone I use about 200MB per month and I use my phone quite regularly. However I am on Wi-Fi for most of the time And if I am out of Wi-Fi Range Then is usually because I am driving and not really using my phone. So for people who use the phone for normal stuff it is actually probably a better deal, But people don't think it is because it is metered but they are probably saving money as a tradeoff of having the same bill every month
Then it stands to reason that they do not need to drop the unlimited plans. They're making more money from it, right?
Personally I'd be less grumpy about it if the tiered plans had some advantage, like improved network coverage etc.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I use the most data while I'm driving. Pandora connected via bluetooth to the audio system of the truck. I'm sure I'm not the only one doing that, I think most average users would do that.
Re: (Score:2)
I use the most data while I'm driving. Pandora connected via bluetooth to the audio system of the truck. I'm sure I'm not the only one doing that, I think most average users would do that.
I don't know anyone who does this - They just play the music thats already stored on their device...
Re:You know the consumer my actually win (Score:5, Insightful)
...but they are probably saving money...
I'm willing to bet that's not true. They probably pay the same amount and the heavy users pay more. There's no way that a telco is going to _reduce_ their overall income unless they are forced to. If they are making a change because they want to, I assure you, they are going to make more money in doing so.
People won't save money unless they are extremely light users and doubtfully even then...
Re: (Score:2)
I don't want to see the iPhone go to Verizon (Score:5, Informative)
People keep clamoring for a Verizon iPhone, but Verizon is the last company you would want to see get its hands on something like that.
Verizon has good coverage, but their customer service is, by all accounts, absolutely atrocious. And now it has gotten to the point where a CSR can get in trouble for helping you save money:
link [nytimes.com]
Verizon has also shown time and time again that it will lock down phones to an extreme degree. If you think AT&T's reluctance to allow tethering is a problem, wait until Verizon gets to dictate terms.
The company nickels-and-dimes its customers to a degree that is shameful even by U.S. cell phone company standards. I have my fingers crossed for an alliance between Apple and T-Mobile. Verizon is just a terrible company.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
What good is a phone if you can't use it? Verizon is the only one of the big four that doesn't suck here in my town. And by "doesn't suck", means I can actually make a call without having to move to a particular location so I can get a clear signal.
I'm personally convinced that tiered pricing is designed to screw people. Here's how.
They take everyone who uses data, and figure that MOST people use around 250-300 MB data / month. They create a Tier at 200MB and now they can charge MORE for their 2 GIG, than "
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Supposedly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You posted the most sensational portion of the article and the most suspect. It's an unnamed "customer service rep" whose providing that information.
On the other hand there's the REST of the article that you chose not to post. Gee, I wonder why...
"First, she flatly denied that a customer service rep can be fired for suggesting a data block. "We train our representatives to solve our customers' problems. If a customer calls and indicates to a representative that a data block would solve his or her problem, t
Re:I don't want to see the iPhone go to Verizon (Score:4, Informative)
Umm you do realize that what the Verizon lady said doesn't contradict what the rep claims to have been told, right?
She literally said, "if the customer tells you to block it, you're allowed to suggest that they block it" - in other words, if you know that blocks exist, the rep is allowed to talk about it.
The rep said, "We are not allowed to suggest a block" - meaning, if the customer doesn't know that such blocks exist, you're not allowed to bring it up. Her statement does not at all contradict the rep's statement, it just seems to if you're not paying attention to the words.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I fail to see the logic. You don't have to use iphone on verizon, but how does it help iphone users if it's ATT exclusive?
Re: (Score:2)
Verizon has also shown time and time again that it will lock down phones to an extreme degree. If you think AT&T's reluctance to allow tethering is a problem, wait until Verizon gets to dictate terms.
I hate to find myself in the position of arguing for the Devil... but Verizon has made some tentative steps away from being the lock-down kings. Their Android offerings lack much of the normal Verizon crap. The latest 2.2 build includes USB tethering (you can do Wifi tethering on your own - though the Droid 1 will only do AdHoc - not all devices like that). We'll see how long this behavior continues. I should note that the tethering is likely to come with a future surcharge but everyone seems to be want
Re: (Score:2)
In light of the fact that they're going to start tiering tighter than what they've got now, I don't know if everyone's going to want to tether these days.
Re: (Score:2)
It all depends on price structure. I'm not really looking forward to how this is going to shake out; my confidence isn't really high for any telecom company. But the silver lining I could see is a low-priced small data plan.
I've got people in my household who would love to get an Android phone but can't justify the $30 data plan. Part of that is that they're rarely out-and-about and spend the vast majority of their time either at home, at school, or the office where wifi is already available. If we can
Re: (Score:2)
People keep clamoring for a Verizon iPhone, but Verizon is the last company you would want to see get its hands on something like that.
As an iPhone owner with unlimited internet I do am still expecting for a Verizon iPhone. It's not about the data, it's about plain signal. Verizon has very good coverage while my iPhone tends to black out in many spots I go to.
Due to the bad signal I end up using my data phone under WiFi and even had to go to the extreme of getting a Skype line number so I could make phone calls from my new home.
At this point I have already decided I will be leaving ATT in January. If the rumored iPhone 4 for Verizon co
Re: (Score:2)
This is good! (Score:2)
This is actually a good thing. Selling a limited "resource" as unlimited is not a sustainable system. Just ask AT&T...
Get Out of Contract Free Card (Score:4, Insightful)
The original post has made it sound like this will be a get out of contract free card. I'm guessing that Verizon will take a path similar to AT&T and grandfather in customers with a current unlimited data plan. Even if Verizon (or AT&T) want to get people off unlimited data plans, they can do it when people upgrade phones. In order to get a new device, they could require that you change plans - and that isn't grounds for termination of the contract (plus, usually you're pretty close to the end of your contract when you can upgrade). After two years, they could forcibly move anyone who didn't get a new device to the non-unlimited data plans and they'd be out of contract already.
Carriers are usually pretty smart about not changing the terms on people currently under contract. Plus, the heaviest data users are probably going to be the ones who want to upgrade to new devices more often - and will be early adopters of 4G. Both of those are chances to get those customers onto non-unlimited data without invalidating the contract. If someone is on an unlimited plan and only using 1GB of data, the carrier is just getting additional money since they're paying for more than they're using. No reason to force those people to switch.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I have AT&T with an unlimited data plan, and when I upgraded to the iPhone 4, they specifically ASKED if I'd like to keep my unlimited data plan.
They should fix the wi-fi on their phones first (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks, I installed that some time ago. It doesn't seem to matter, I can be sitting right next to the hotspot (it's behind my monitor) and it will still stop communicating and require that I restart the wifi. I've had the same problem in many locations, hotels, coffee shops, my living room, it will work for some random length of time, and then just stop. If I need a reliable connection for email or something like that, I switch to 3G.
I've heard there's an app that will disable the power saving feature of the wifi; apparently there may be some DHCP issues between router & phone when the phone's wifi goes to sleep.
So this confirms.. (Score:4, Insightful)
iPhone on Verizon?
If it makes tethering cheaper, I'm in (Score:2)
If, at the same time as they institute tiered data plans, Verizon also brings the price of tethering down, then I am in.
They have been using the argument that "tethering costs more because tethered users use more data" to justify charging US$60 for tethering vs. US$30 for smartphone use. If they go tiered, then logically that argument should be mooted, and they should bring the cost of tethering down.
Of course, this being Verizon, to make that actually happen would require the use of a Bambleweeny 57 Sub-me
There should be NO price of tethering! (Score:5, Insightful)
I bought a pipe to the internet, I should be able to do what I want with it. If it's limited to 2 GB of data or whatever, then so be it, but that's different than saying "If you connect a phone it's $25, but if you connect a laptop, it's $15 more for the same exact data." It's price gouging people who use laptops just for the convenience of using a full size keyboard and monitor.
It's also the way the big providers are trying to cash in on demand at the same time limiting demand for their own broke ass networks. If you really want it, you have to pay thru the nose, and we'll price it high enough that we won't get overloaded since we don't upgrade our networks fast enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Some of us don't pay extra for tethering [google.com], and have been avoiding this trap for awhile.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Let's face it... (Score:2)
IP-based services need more spectrum (Score:2, Interesting)
I think most consumers can rest assured that
GB = 1000 or 1024? (Score:2)
That was brief... (Score:2)
I wonder how well it's working out for AT&T (Score:2)
I got cheap and switched to 200MB plan. As a result I now have two devices - iPhone and iPad - on their network for the price of one. Neither comes close to the limit - last month was 66MB - as I am nearly always in range of a free wireless network when using phone extensively. Had they only offered old unlimited $30/month plans for both, I would be paying them double the money for data without putting any extra strain on their network. Effectively they are encouraging people to reduce their dependence on c
prepaid (Score:2)
No problems here. Prepaid, so can pay or not pay, use or not use.. makes no difference. Only recurring thing is 50 cent/month keep alive fee.
5 cent minute/10 cent meg/2 cent text.
If I was a heavy data user I'd do something else, but I use it mostly as a phone and use maybe $20 worth total a month.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Platinumtel. They are on Sprint's network, so not as much coverage. They do have better coverage for me in my local area though.
http://www.platinumtel.com/ [platinumtel.com]
I got my phone through http://lindonet.com/ [lindonet.com] A Blackberry 7130e which does 3G. Right now they are running a deal on a 8703e with 200 minutes of credit for $40.
Re: (Score:2)
Verizon should be paying *you*, not charging you (Score:2)
Verizon should be paying *you*, not charging you to use an Android phone. Verizon makes $$ signing license deals with companies (i.e. Skype, Amazon, etc) to put "always running" applications the handsets. If you stop the applications, they will re-start automatically depending on user actions on the phone (i.e. incoming SMS, outgoing phone call, etc).
companies hell bent on killing their own business (Score:2)
I really don't get it. Companies continue to push the latest stuff like streaming video, voip, wireless gaming, time shifting but then try their best to make that damn near impossible. In my area even the cable companies are getting into it, my neighborhood is so over subscribed that my 4g clear mifi router is faster than my cable connection...thats just sad.
Re:Bait and switch (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Extra charges per MB. Commenting on the subject of jumping ship when they change, though, I can't say that there's much in the way of choice if you're wanting adequate coverage for more than voice service- pretty much everyone is going to screw you on exceeding that infamous 5Gb cap on those "unlimited" plans- even Sprint will do that. So "jumping ship" is a bit flawed in thinking if you're actually using/needing those smartphone functions. In the large, I use them for business uses, so...
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
No, this is totally incorrect. T-Mobile and Sprint in the US both provide truly unlimited data. On Sprint, for example, I used 50GB a month for a few months on the 3G network before I bought a Clear 4G subscription.
Re: (Score:2)
That has been the case with AT&T too (at least for the iPhone), until recently. They gave you what was labelled an "unlimited" plan, but the cap was really 5GB.
Now, my choices are 200MB (!!!) for $15/month (going over gives you another 200MB for another $15), or 2GB for $25/month (going over gives you another 1GB for another $10, up to 3 additional GB).
Even worse, they charge $20 just to enable tethering, and in doing so you get exactly zero additional data.
Re: (Score:2)
The old "unlimited" data plan contract included language which would allow them to take action if they decided too many customers used more than 5GB. To paraphrase the legalese they used, they basically said "we *could* consider 5GB to be 'too much' if we decided to."
Regardless of whether 5GB was the actual number, the fact is their "unlimited" data plan contract did permit AT&T to impose actual data transfer limits.
Re: (Score:2)
I merely said that the iPhone unlimited data contract allowed AT&T to take action against users who used what they considered to be excessive amounts. Whether AT&T actually did so is irrelevant.
Nevertheless, when I get home I will dig out the contract AT&T mailed me after I got my iPhone last year and let you know what it says. (If you really want I'll even scan it for you.)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Not true.
Been discussed before. Etc.
Blah, blah, blah.
Verizon is Verizon is Verizon is Verizon, whether in GA, MN, TN, VA, or FU.
Verizon currently does offer an unlimited data plan, but only for smartphones. There are no specified limit
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, business pretty much always works like this - a company introduces a new tech, or new companies enter the market, and you get some (relatively) good deals (sometimes - I'm still not convinced that at close to $100/mo for one phone, the 'unlimited' plans were much of a good deal - just not AS BAD a deal as their *other* offerings.
In the end, when you see good deals (or at least deals you can live with), take advantage of them while you can. Yes, it won't last forever.
Take for example, Hulu.com - when i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, I could get a really reasonable plan, a really reliable cell phone and decent-enough service if I really wanted it. But most geeks don't want "reliable" we want cutting edge, we don't care if it is a bit unstable, we can fix it.
The thing is, consumer advocates advocate for the bottom of the barrel f
Re: (Score:2)
Such as who, exactly?
Not one of their existing competitors, who have been even more eager to do exactly the same thing.
So who exactly is going to manage to set up a new competing mobile broadband network, and where are they going to get the massive sums of money required to pay for the kind of infrastructure that will be necessary?
Remember, we're not just talking about having wifi hotspots in the center of a single
Re: (Score:2)
This has what to do with network neutrality?
People need to stop confusing the issues.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)