Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Cellphones Handhelds Wireless Networking

Verizon Confirms Plan To Switch Away From Unlimited Data Plans 207

Posted by Soulskill from the but-the-wireless-tubes-are-infinite dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Verizon Confirms Plan To Switch Away From Unlimited Data Plans More

Verizon Confirms Plan To Switch Away From Unlimited Data Plans

Comments Filter:

  • Come on... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Pojut ( 1027544 )

    ...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)

      by Pojut ( 1027544 )

      Meant to add an "etc" on the end of that....

      • Re:Come on... (Score:5, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 24, 2010 @03:27PM (#33691620)

        Huh?

        If your /etc directory is 2 gigs, I think you're doing something wrong.

        • 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
          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 /usr/myname

          made me chuckle

    • That's AT&T's tiered policy. Verizon hasn't announced their tiered pricing structure yet.

      • 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!

        • Oh, I'm quite sure they'll let you go to 800MB for $60!

        • Re:Come on... (Score:5, Informative)

          by Kiuas ( 1084567 ) on Friday September 24, 2010 @05:11PM (#33692874)

          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)

      by idobi ( 820896 )
      Seriously? There's a $10 difference between 200M and 2Gb and you want verizon to get that glandular with their plans?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Pojut ( 1027544 )

        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".

        • 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)

            by causality ( 777677 )

            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.

      • That's the whole point. Why does the 200MB plan cost $15, if an additional 1.8 gigs only costs another $10. At that scale of economies, they really should just offer unlimited plans.

        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)

          by Pojut ( 1027544 )

          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)

            by emag ( 4640 )

            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.

          • 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)

          by Cylix ( 55374 ) *

          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)

            by Sancho ( 17056 ) *

            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.

            • 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)

                by Sancho ( 17056 ) *

                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

              • 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)

          by Svartalf ( 2997 )

          That's the whole point. Why does the 200MB plan cost $15, if an additional 1.8 gigs only costs another $10. At that scale of economies, they really should just offer unlimited plans.

          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)

        by JDevers ( 83155 )

        Did you mean granular?

    • Re:Come on... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Rich0 ( 548339 ) on Friday September 24, 2010 @03:29PM (#33691638) Homepage

      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.

      • Electric companies already do this, its called Time of Use [srpnet.com]
         

        • Re:Come on... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Rich0 ( 548339 ) on Friday September 24, 2010 @04:23PM (#33692382) Homepage

          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)

        by Mitreya ( 579078 ) <mitreya.gmail@com> on Friday September 24, 2010 @04:04PM (#33692112)
        What's wrong with something simple like bill=roundup(GBUsedInMonth)*$5 or something like that?

        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)

      by h4rr4r ( 612664 )

      And what about folks who want more than that?

    • how about no blocks just $0.01 per MB or big blocks with rollover.

    • Re:Come on... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Totenglocke ( 1291680 ) on Friday September 24, 2010 @03:51PM (#33691922)

      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)

      by blair1q ( 305137 )

      Unless that's per day, it's not nearly enough.

    • It's targeted to make most users upgrade to the bigger plan, while still giving them less.

  • You know the consumer my actually win (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Friday September 24, 2010 @03:27PM (#33691622)

    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

    • 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)

      by wolfgang_spangler ( 40539 )

      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 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)

      by whisper_jeff ( 680366 ) on Friday September 24, 2010 @03:41PM (#33691794)

      ...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...

    • Man, speak for yourself on that. I'm stuck with a 4gb cap and use a program to monitor my use. I stream a lot of media, podcasts, music, etc. The only reason I don't go over is because I take an active effort to keep track of it.

  • I don't want to see the iPhone go to Verizon (Score:5, Informative)

    by Y-Crate ( 540566 ) on Friday September 24, 2010 @03:36PM (#33691730)

    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]

    "Effective this past month, all CSRs [customer-service reps} were versed on the usage of blocks. A new policy has gone into effect regarding how to handle Escalated Calls regarding data charges. Now, a representative can be reprimanded and even terminated for proactively offering to block any of the following:

    Web Access Blocks
    Data Blocks
    Premium SMS blocking
    Application download blocking
    Vcast Music or Vcast Video download blocks

    "Essentially, we are to upsell customers on the $9.99 25mb/month or $29.99 unlimited packages for customers. Customers are not to be credited for charges unless they ask for the credit. And in cases such as data or premium SMS, where the occurrences may have gone months without the consumer noticing, only an initial credit can be issued."

    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)

      by Archangel Michael ( 180766 )

      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)

        by jav1231 ( 539129 )
        Meanwhile Sprint's customer service has improved steadily and more than any other carrier's in the last three JD Power surveys. In another survey, they exceeded not just their industry but every industry covered under that survey. Just sayin' they're CS is better and they're keeping their data plans as-is which has been lower than AT&T and Verizon for a couple of years or more.
        • Plus they have tower-sharing agreements with Verizon - which means you get the best of the Verizon network, too.

          Supposedly.
    • This is all very interesting given what happened to me. We were using well under the number of minutes provided by our plan (the smallest published family plan) and I got a letter from Verizon offering to switch us to a lower minute (and about 15% lower priced) non-published plan. When I called about it, the CSR was exceptionally helpful and got it set right up for us. I'm sure it reset our contract, but since we were just getting the same features cheaper, so what. We still don't use anywhere near the

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Buelldozer ( 713671 )

      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)

        by IICV ( 652597 ) on Friday September 24, 2010 @05:01PM (#33692806)

        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.

    • It's not just their customers they nickel and dime. A friend of mine just got a job managing a Verizon store. Not only is she surprised by reading up on all the fees they charge their customers at every turn, but she is also finding out that they will try and screw her out of everything they promised they'd pay her. She is still officially in training and not 3 weeks into the job but is being pressured into taking her final test now. Should have been taking it from the start they say. The results of this te

    • 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?

    • 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)

        by Svartalf ( 2997 )

        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.

        • 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

    • 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

  • 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)

    by saterdaies ( 842986 ) on Friday September 24, 2010 @03:39PM (#33691766)

    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)

      by Vegeta99 ( 219501 )

      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.

  • If the wi-fi on my Droid would work consistently, I wouldn't care about limited data plans. Since Verizon doesn't see fit to fix the problems (or from what I have seen, even acknowledge they exist) they should just leave their data plans alone.

  • So this confirms.. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by microbee ( 682094 ) on Friday September 24, 2010 @03:42PM (#33691804)

    iPhone on Verizon?

  • 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)

      by hellfire ( 86129 ) <deviladv AT gmail DOT com> on Friday September 24, 2010 @03:53PM (#33691938) Homepage

      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)

        by adolf ( 21054 )

        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.

        Some of us don't pay extra for tethering [google.com], and have been avoiding this trap for awhile.

    • If you are using an Android phone, check out easytether in the app market.
  • We all knew this was coming. It was only a matter of time before a carrier did that and as soon as it happened anyone with most of their brain active could tell the rest of the carriers would follow suit within 2 years. Someone might offer unlimited data, but it won't be a carrier that the majority of the world will care about. Having said that there's little reason to jump ship. However, you might be able to finagle an early upgrade date for your "New Every Two".
  • I agree with jellomizer; most users won't hit their caps in a given period in the near term. We just switched from T-Mobile to VZ (I've gone from zero to 4 bars in parts of my building at work), but we seriously considered AT&T--which was off the table until they switched to cheaper but limited data. Price matters. My wife would be fine on 200 MB/mo, and with a little restraint I would be, too. I'd be comfortable with the 2 GB cap as much as 3-5 years out.

    I think most consumers can rest assured that
  • This is going to start being a real issue that could amount to many dollars per month for many people. Will these new tiered plans warn you when you're about to get charged (which Verizon does when you attempt to tether, instead of using an implicit agreement)? Whether they do or not, 120MB is a lot of browsing that I don't get to do when I'm at the edge of my 5GB limit (the only higher tier available around here).
  • I remember seeing the commercials just a few months ago where Verizon was bragging about reducing the rate for their "unlimited everything" plan.

  • 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

  • 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.

    • What carrier are you using? I don't think I've seen a plan with texts that cheap before. Mine is 5 cent minute/8 cent text/no data from www.pagepluscellular.com, which met my criteria as the cheapest CDMA/Verizon prepaid carrier in the US at the time.

      • 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.

        • Wow, thank you for that link. My brother was recently asking if he could get on my Verizon plan, as his Tracfone is no longer economical. These guys look like they would be super cheap for him, though (certainly a lot better than getting on Verizon).

  • 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).

  • 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.

Slashdot Top Deals

We are Microsoft. Unix is irrelevant. Openness is futile. Prepare to be assimilated.

Close