MacDailyNews Take: Layin’ the groundwork for something? 
Bartash continues, “Chief Technology Officer Dick Lynch said current data plans, which allow unlimited Internet access for a flat monthly fee, encourage overuse of wireless networks, mainly by a small number of ‘bandwidth hogs,’ or individuals who send and receive lots of large files.”
“Lynch said wireless companies will be able to handle increasing Internet usage over the next few years by upgrading to the next generation of wireless technology. But in the longer run, he said carriers will need additional spectrum and new ways of billing that encourage more efficient use of wireless airwaves,” Bartash reports. “‘We will end up billing differently in the future,’ said Lynch, repeating his long-held view that carriers should charge on a metered basis just like water and power companies.”
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Lynn W.” for the heads up.]
I just got back from Germany where you can buy a pay-as-you-go USB data modem for $45, with daily rates costing around $5, or $30 a month. Verizon offers the same thing for $130 for the modem, and $15 a day. What a difference! Germany also offers a much greater range of tiers for customers than here. It all really brought home to me just how much the US cellular providers are ripping us off here, it’s really too bad we can’t do anything about it. Instead of paying $40 or even $50 for Internet, why couldn’t we have a rate for, say, $20 for 5GB? This would solve the “hogs” problem, and would make the prices more reasonable for most of us.
So we get charged for text messages – which run on the control channel and cost the networks nothing – and now we need metered data pricing too?
Why don’t networks use the money they’re gouging from consumers text-messaging to subsidise the data “costs” …?
actually they are talking about exactly what you are. raising the price for those that are junkies and very likely lowering it for those that use very little to none
@Brau, leodavinci, Powers, Gabriel
“In 2008 and through Q3 of 2009, AT&T;invested approximately $19 billion toward wireless…”
That’s B for billion not million.
Then after they do that, look at the network analysis to see how much extra bandwidth you have and see every bit get used up right away.
That has got to be a bit overwhelming.
No one. Absolutely no one had any idea how much of an explosion the iPhone was going to be. Everyone thought Apple was insane predicting they would sell 8 million iPhones by a certain date. They totally crushed it. Now on the 3rd version, the iPhone is still growing exponentially.
Once again, all the experts and competitors said it would not happen.
You have to put yourself in the position of an engineer trying to guess how much money to ask from higher ups to double wireless capacity in certain areas. How quickly will it grow?
Apparently all the experts were wrong.
Plus many users probably have no idea the bandwidth difference of ethernet vs. 3G. Your work network can easliy be 1000baseT, that’s Gigabit ethernet, or 1,000Mbit. The iPhone 3G is 3.6Mbit at best. That means your work network is 277 times faster moving data and video from servers to workstation.
The 3G wireless is not as fast as a 20 year old network standard of 10BaseT.
Apple and Google should team up, yeah yeah I know they’re supposed to be enemies, and buy Sprint, and turn their bandwidth into all data, free to users of Apple and Google phones.
Over @ PixoBeBo recently Kateie Mac opined that the cell companies are selling gym memberships- not service and have gotten away with inadequate networks because most didn’t use what they were paying for and as smart phone usage increases, the cracks are showing. Otherwise, it’s not so much a technology program as it is an undercapacity network.
Of course they need to shift to tiered pricing, especially for the top 5% heaviest users. A the high usage hogs need to get a grip–if we want a decent network, either you pay for it or the rest of us half to subsidize you. So get a grip, the rest of see right through your lame attempt to blame the telcos. Oh, and if any one of the telcos does try to rip us off, we’ll just switch to one of the others. No stupid comparisons to high density countries that are more easily serviced (eg, Germany) is going to fool us. No they’re not all “conspiring” against us. Peddle your free lunch for yourselves somewhere else.
No one seems to understand. It’s all so simple.
If I want it, it should be free. If you want it, it should be very expensive, so that mine will be free.
The logic is perfect.
Don’t you get it?
I once owned a business. I lost money on every transaction, but people loved me so much that I made up for it in volume. Until I could not do it any more.
You do see how that works, don’t you?
Why don’t they just stop putting out things like VCast and not allow smartphones with data centric usability allowing other companies that encourage mobile device evolution to deal with that? All of our data bandwidth is a small fraction of what other countries provide on a Mb/s rate. They are just showing that they want to milk the current system instead of upgrading to what people really want to do with their devices. So bottom line, Verizon should leave smartphones and other mobile media capable devices to networks that give a damn like Sprint and ATT.
Here in HK, I thought I use lots of bandwidth and subscribe an unlimited data plan vs the less expensive 500MB / month plan. It turns out I didn’t even consume 500MB after 3 months. So I agree they should charge less for those using less.
Macguy said: ” I have to agree to some extent. It makes no commercial sense that a few, maybe 2% of users will use 30% of the bandwidth.
I suggest, charge the abuser and leave everyone else alone.”
—————————————————
I think if given the chance, the telcos like Verizon will lower the bar and define bandwidth hogs as people who download a few iTunes movies to their Apple TV or iPhone every month. If you give them an inch, the telcos WILL take a mile……
Wireless technology has been grooming for last few years. It’s really a great revolution in E world.
<a href=”http://www.wholesaletoner.com.au/canon-c-17.html”>canon cartridges sydney<>
The question, of course, is how Verizon defines “bandwidth hogs”? It’s very hard to believe that Verizon would pass up any opportunity to put the screws to its customers.
Sorry for my last comment it was by mistaken. Wireless technology has been grooming for last few years. It’s really a great revolution in E world.
canon cartridges sydney
@kenh
Yep. Exactly.
Me, me, me, me, me…..
God help these idiots if we ever have another great depression.
“smartphones with data centric usability “
heh, that’s a hoot…spoken like a true government tit-sucker.
Before I had a smart phone, my monthly cell phone bill was $40/month. With my iPhone that doubled. I think $80/month is plenty for the phone company and I don’t want to be told I have to pay more.
Of course, Verizon is the company that lost the iPhone because Steve Jobs wouldn’t allow them to disable features a la carte? He wanted unlimited data for a set fee and Verizon told him to stick it.
And Verizon doubled their cancellation fee to over $300. Why anyone stays with Verizon is beyond me.
Logical: infinite bandwidth doeasn’t exist.
Can you imagine any other industry in which the people who use the service the most are villified and called names by the supplier? What if Domino’s called their biggest customers “pizza hogs”?
The telcos made a deal with us, gave us a contract and now they don’t like it that people are actually using what they promised – i.e. unlimited data. Fine. Put in a new deal for new customers. Offer cheaper plans for people who use less data, put in metered charging, whatever. It’s a free market. Just don’t go around insulting and alienating your customers.
I have never understood the arrogance and animosity with which the telcos treat their customers. They may not often have much of a choice, but usually there is at least some choice and they will go elsewhere just as soon as they have a chance.
@montex
“And Verizon doubled their cancellation fee to over $300. Why anyone stays with Verizon is beyond me.”
Well, I would guess that people stay with them ’cause the cancellation fee is $300+. What I do not understand why anyone would sign up with them now.
And I really don’t get why people keep wanting to get the iPhone on Verizon. wtf? Verizon seems like the worst telco around. T-Mobile maybe, but Verizon? no thanks.
You can do metered. AFTER you lower the prices to the quarter of what they are today. And then add $0.007 for each text message because it costs you probably half of that. Music as a sound can not be that expensive either because it’s just a sound as voice is. So at last video. You can charge for that $0.30 per movie. Now go meter!
“…”Chief Technology Officer Dick Lynch said current data plans, which allow unlimited Internet access for a flat monthly fee, encourage overuse of wireless networks, mainly by a small number of ‘bandwidth hogs,’ or individuals who send and receive lots of large files…”
“…I have to agree to some extent. It makes no commercial sense that a few, maybe 2% of users will use 30% of the bandwidth.
I suggest, charge the abuser and leave everyone else alone….”
—
NO, NO, NO!
These broadband customers who actually use the “unlimited” service for which they pay and already are downloading a large amount of video and photo data are NOT bandwidth hogs! They merely are at the forefront for the type of usage all Internet customers soon will engage in. DO NOT fall for this type of telecommunications industry misinformation. Fight this.
Besides, if carriers really wanna’ charge based on usage, they also should be forced to issue comparable credits for leftover bandwidth that is NOT consumed used each month.
In other words, it all balances out.
It’s true some people use a ton of bandwidth all the time. I’m one of them. By wired Internet is always downloading or uploading something. AT&T;has never said anything about it. Ever. I probably moved 10 gigs today of data. I live AT&T;that way.
Wireless, i think as we move to 4g and other technologies, the strain on networks will diminish. A lot of the problem is not so much people using data, but that they are waiting for the data to arrive….and in the mean time, someone else gets on the 3g network and requests a page…etc etc
I think if they made it faster, things will improve a lot more overall and this whole metering thing will go away
AND BANDWIDTH CONSERVERS SHOULD PAY LESS. Greedy bastards.
“bandwidth hog” “abuser” – these are loaded terms meant to set the terms of the discussion in a manner favorable to the telcos.
Don’t let them get away with it.
We all signed a contract that allows for, AND CHARGES for, unlimited usage.
If they want, they can offer contracts that cap out at lower limits – but they’ll have to charge less for them, otherwise, people will not go for it.