Related
I wrote them an email asking why my data connections were so slow. Here was my reply:
Hi *****,
Thanks for your email to Virgin Mobile about your new phone.
We can only provide you with the information that's stated on the website when it comes to the technical information as we're not given any additional facts of the phone. After checking the website it doesn't state anything in regards to what the speeds should be when the phone is connected to the internet. If you'd like to take a look, click here.
There isn't any speed caps involved on your Virgin Mobile contract. Your HTC HD2 is able to connect at up to 3.5G, also known as HDSPA. You may find the connection slow if the tower you are connecting to is a 2G tower. You can identify what speed your connection is by looking at the top-right corner of the phone, a G icon would mean a slow connection. A 3 or a H should allow you to view web pages extremely quickly.
If you find that you're not getting on with the phone and you're unhappy with how it runs you've got 28 days from purchase to return the phone.
We hope that the above information provides useful.
If there's anything else we can help you with, just reply to this email. You can also give us a call on 789 from any Virgin Mobile phone – it's just 10p, no matter how long you talk for. Or, you can call us on 0845 6000 789 from a fixed line phone. These calls are charged at local rate.
Kind regards,
*****
Virgin Mobile
So I've got a phone capable of 'up to 3.5G' but they make no claim about what speeds I should be getting.
Bear this in mind if you're thinking of going Virgin too.
There is no network in the world that can gaurantee that you will be getting HSDPA speed 100% of the time.
Thats just common sense mate.
:facepalm:
Audio Oblivion said:
There is no network in the world that can gaurantee that you will be getting HSDPA speed 100% of the time.
Thats just common sense mate.
:facepalm:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are correct.
But surely there should be a minimum amount of service a customer should expect.
Imagine a water utility company saying they couldn't guarantee how much water would come through the pipes, but you should pay your bills anyway for 'up to' a certain amount of water per month. And if it falls to a cupful of water per day, then too bad, it just means your neighbours were using a lot of water, tough.
I'm not expecting full speed 3G. I'm expecting pages like this one to load faster than 1 minute later, and without constant drop outs when I'm sat still in a chair in central London with full bar reception and my phone displaying 3G at the top.
There are so many variables to consider, forum usage can slow down, bandwidth usage in your area, atmospheric conditions etc, I'm also on virgin and when browsing this site on opera via 3G speeds are plenty addequate, no more than 3 seconds between links.
Sometimes i will get dropouts too but they are very rare the 3G network is massively over stretched with the popularity of 3G dongles and people sat there torrenting and what not, this is why the FUP is in effect, the 3G network at the moment cannot sustain a free for all.
Having said this you should be expected to get a reasonable service, in the past when on Tmobile, same as Virgin as it happens I have complained when not having any service for 3 days and they have knocked a few quid off my bill.
I found this on another forum from a poster called DBMandrake:
----
Having been with Virgin (with my iPhone) and then leaving them due to their poor data network I feel I should comment here.
Virgin can not (or will not) provide true HSDPA speeds on a mobile plan. Even if you see an HSDPA indicator on your phone, at best you will get around 350kbit/sec, which is standard 3G speed not HSDPA, as they throttle the bandwidth. You can get HSDPA speeds on a mobile broadband dongle from Virgin, but not on a data plan for a phone.
Before a dozen people jump in and say "but I get more than 350Kbit on Virgin", some older grandfathered plans may still have uncapped speeds, but currently selling ones do not.
I contacted technical support on more than one occasion regarding this and they were unable to do anything or offer any means of increasing the speeds above 350kbit, (even by paying more) and were unaware of what speeds I should be receiving in the first place, and had no idea whether 350kbit constituted an acceptable speed.
Secondly, Virgin put all web traffic through an image optimizer that dramatically compresses the images. While that may look acceptable on a 1 inch screen, and speed up page loads, it looks god awful on an iPhone screen, especially when zooming in, and there is NO way on a mobile phone to disable or bypass this image optimizer.
Both of these policies are in place because T-Mobile (whose network Virgin piggybacks on) also have these policies, except in T-Mobile's case you CAN pay more to get your speed uncapped (web 'n walk plus tethering addon) but you still cannot get the image optimizer disabled.
For these reasons (and others) I left Virgin and went to 3 and never looked back. No annoying image optimizer, and uncapped speeds which regularly exceed 1.2Mbit and go as high as 3Mbit in some locations, and far better 3G coverage to boot. No comparison if data is important to you as it is to me.
-----
http://www.talk3g.co.uk/showthread.php?p=36854
I can only assume it's a problem in certain areas, which by the nature of things there's not much that can be done, other than put more masts in, its purely down to location and network load.
But if the limit on Virgin/Tmobile is capped at 350kbit is that really a problem for general browsing, email and social networking? I certainly haven't encounted a lack of bandwidth since moving to virgin last week.
I would think the limit is there to keep the network usuable to all, as said before an unlimited uncapped network would surely grind to halt. If you read virgins T&C they state they cannot guarantee any speeds, to do so would be wrong due to the nature of the of the whole system.
I'll admit I'm being a bit hyper sensitve to the data rates. It's because I was really excited about the HD2 and really putting it through its paces. Which I can do, apart from mobile web, which is more of a gentle Sunday stroll after lunch... with my gran.
I appreciate that it's a bit of a phone mast lottery when it comes to data rates, but when you work in Zone 1 of London you'd expect the infrastructure to be better able to cope by now.
And I detest the whole 'up to' measurement on data when advertising plans. I understand why it's written such, but providers should have to provide a realistic picture of what the average punter can expect on a daily basis. Not what theoretical person could get while pigs are landing on the moon.
Virgin Speed
I have seen this in other forums.
I have gone to a speed test site (www.dslreports.com) and run from opera browser with both phones on my desk showing 4bars (H)
- on my HD with orange 1M to 1.2M
- on my HD2 with Virgin getting 200k - 250k.
Will be looking into this further with a view to returning HD2 under 28day return policy.
After reading of a new Mytouch HD product that is coming for T-Mobile Im pretty impressed with specs but very turned off by the looks.
So that makes me wonder does vibrant have the technology to run on T-mobile's 4G network with simple software updates?
Reason I am asking this is because I know The iphone 4G will be able to run on 4G network as soon as AT&T launch their 4G service.
Thanks for any knowledge in advance
.... Google is your best friend, its not 4g it's hspa+ on order to take advantage of that speed you ned the physical hardware in the phone which only the g2 had right now, in regards to the iphone 4, I've never heard anything about att launching any 4g network, I also work for att, the iphone doesn't have any hardware that support any faster speeds as far as I know
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
iPhone can handle ATT's new "Faster 3G", but they don't have 4G. My understanding is the Vibrant can do HSPa, but not HSPa+? I don't know the difference but that's what i understand. 2G, 3G and HSPa.
4G is just a marketing terms for the masses. After you look at this link...
http://shop.sprint.com/en/stores/popups/4G_coverage_popup.shtml
You should realize that the Vibrant is already capable of reaching the "average" speeds listed here (in areas with proper coverage). Wait...how is that possible?! It's not a 4G phone. Who cares!!! T-Mobile's network and phones already meet or exceed the speeds Sprint is advertising here. T-Mobile is way ahead of the curve here but they're not marketing the hell out of it. FYI, the average website (ATM) may have trouble maintaining a consistent throughput of 5-6 Mbps anyway. Even if you can go faster, does it really matter when the other side can't (yet)?
AlexSochi8 said:
After reading of a new Mytouch HD product that is coming for T-Mobile Im pretty impressed with specs but very turned off by the looks.
So that makes me wonder does vibrant have the technology to run on T-mobile's 4G network with simple software updates?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
T-Mobile does not have a 4G network, and they probably won't roll out 4G for at least 5 years
Reason I am asking this is because I know The iphone 4G will be able to run on 4G network as soon as AT&T launch their 4G service.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apple hasn't announced a 4G Iphone, so (by definition) you really don't know what you're talking about.
AT&T is set to roll out LTE, but it will almost certainly be data-only devices as they work the kinks out. (As Verizon has done)
Thanks for any knowledge in advance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should ask yourself why you care about 4G. I doubt you'll notice much of a decrease in load times, and the carriers are probably going to charge out the yin-yang for the enhanced features they will be able to offer to everyone with 4G.
AT&T and Verizon are going to limited data (AT&T already has). You should really look past all the marketing and hype. All the carriers are guilty of confusing the public to serve their interests.
All T-Mobile phones will benefit from HSPA+ as it's backward compatible. However, the theoretical maximum throughput on the Vibrant (or any legacy phone) that doesn't have the HSPA+ antenna built in caps out around 7Mbs as I recall. The G2 which is built to run HSPA+ has a theoretical througput around 15-20 I believe.
Seriously though, even 7Mbs is pretty stupid fast for a cell phone.
Xard said:
All T-Mobile phones will benefit from HSPA+ as it's backward compatible. However, the theoretical maximum throughput on the Vibrant (or any legacy phone) that doesn't have the HSPA+ antenna built in caps out around 7Mbs as I recall. The G2 which is built to run HSPA+ has a theoretical througput around 15-20 I believe.
Seriously though, even 7Mbs is pretty stupid fast for a cell phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Clear explanation
But one thing, i am in Boston and my vibrant never reach over 50KB/s...wtf
It supposed to have the + network already...
I get 6mbps on my vibrant on hspa. Home wifi I get only 2.8, I see no difference in browser page loading time..
Downloading w will be faster but whatever.. 6 is all I need. I've only seen some people getting 8 on their g2s, meh, I'm happy with 6..... Hell I'm happy with 3mbps....
Emama said:
Clear explanation
But one thing, i am in Boston and my vibrant never reach over 50KB/s...wtf
It supposed to have the + network already...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Check the data icon top center - should be two arrows (up/down) and 'G','E', or '3G' to indicate tech. GPRS would be my guess for 50k... EDGE should reach around 200kbps. (I've maxed at about 1.8 mbps 3g in Charlotte, about 210k edge nearer home, and about 12mpbs wifi - same locations as that last my netbook gets 40-70mpbs though.
Check 'settings'->'wireless and network'->'mobile networks' and make sure '2g only' is unchecked. If so I'd suspect a hardware problem. (double-check that 3g is available where you're testing, of course)
j
newkirk said:
Check the data icon top center - should be two arrows (up/down) and 'G','E', or '3G' to indicate tech. GPRS would be my guess for 50k... EDGE should reach around 200kbps. (I've maxed at about 1.8 mbps 3g in Charlotte, about 210k edge nearer home, and about 12mpbs wifi - same locations as that last my netbook gets 40-70mpbs though.
Check 'settings'->'wireless and network'->'mobile networks' and make sure '2g only' is unchecked. If so I'd suspect a hardware problem. (double-check that 3g is available where you're testing, of course)
j
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is 3g network already,
My phone and my gf's one has the same result
I can have up to 2000kB/s with my home Wi-Fi....but tmo network sucks..
I never see a "G" in that blue icon
And the above result is based on the 3G icon...if it is E, it has only 4-5 kB/s! !!
Any other guy in Boston can tell me if it is T-Mobile network sucks or my phone
I live in Cambridge and just did the speed-test, 3g w/2 bars in my apartment. 129kbps download 614 upload. It really varies quite a bit probably depending upon network traffic.
Xard said:
All T-Mobile phones will benefit from HSPA+ as it's backward compatible. However, the theoretical maximum throughput on the Vibrant (or any legacy phone) that doesn't have the HSPA+ antenna built in caps out around 7Mbs as I recall. The G2 which is built to run HSPA+ has a theoretical througput around 15-20 I believe.
Seriously though, even 7Mbs is pretty stupid fast for a cell phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does the 7mb cap only apply to hspa, or hspa+. Because on my wireless g network I get blazing speeds.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
ackattacker said:
I live in Cambridge and just did the speed-test, 3g w/2 bars in my apartment. 129kbps download 614 upload. It really varies quite a bit probably depending upon network traffic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am talking about KB not kbps,
129 kbps is really slow!
I try to compare my friend incredible verizon network at Cambridge
He has 280KB while i have only 45KB download....damn
I get 5mbs in my hspa area on the vibrant.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Should I call T-Mobile to ask about it as it is ridiculous to have only 50-70kB (Less than 0.6 Mbits) in HSPA+ area
jayprime said:
Does the 7mb cap only apply to hspa, or hspa+. Because on my wireless g network I get blazing speeds.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
theoretical caps. HSDPA 7.2Mbps, T-mobile's variety of HSPA+ 21Mbps according to a T-mobile press release, Wi-fi G 54Mbps.
real word numbers HSDPA 1-5Mbps in good coverage depending on network traffic, HDPA+ on a vibrant 3-7 Mbps again depending on network traffic, Wi-fi... depends on your home internet connection speed.
Some people seem to misunderstand whether or not a non HSPA+ phone (such as ours) can benefit from HSPA+. It indeed can, but not in a straightforward way. In order for T-Mobile to support HSPA+ in a given market they must make reasonable upgrades to their networks backhaul capacity to support it. And these backhaul upgrades will become more important as T-Mobile actually begins selling HSPA+ devices.
One of the most important factors often overlooked with any network is it's backhaul capacity. Bottlenecks in familiar networks can easily make themselves apparent. Take for example the traditional DSL and Cable networks most of us use for wired internet service.
While you may pay for a given advertised speed, whether or not you actually see those speeds has less to do with the connection type and more oftentimes to do with how it has been implemented. In the case of DSL for instance, whether or not you can experience your advertised speed reliably depends on how many other customers are routed through the same DSLAM, *AND* how good the backhaul connection from the DSLAM is to your providers internal network. The same thing occurs with Cable and how many customers are aggregated into a given areas HFC. Bottlenecks within cable and dsl infrastructures occur at different points (because they're architecturally different), but once your outside those infrastructures they both share the potential for having backhaul bottlenecks.
In my area cable is way the fastest connection option, and though I do not pay for the highest speed tier here (15/2, instead of the 10/1 I have), when 10/1 was the fastest tier I'd rarely actually see those speeds. Now I see those speeds reliably. Why? Well there are many factors that effect a network topology, but it's clear that in order to reasonably support 15/2, my cable provider had to make sure it's backhaul could actually handle the load, so it was likely updated to accommodate this.
Hope this clarifies things a bit.
I thought the data cap on the Vibrant was 4.9Mb/5Mb a sec. Im running gingerclone r2
Sent from Samsung Vibrant
boimarc89 said:
I thought the data cap on the Vibrant was 4.9Mb/5Mb a sec. Im running gingerclone r2
Sent from Samsung Vibrant
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Should not be a data cap on speed, just bandwidth. 5Gb per billing cycle.
Edit: Lucky, I only get about 3Mbs on Wi-Fi and I am paying my cable company for 5Mbs. On cell the my worst is 190Kbs, but my best is only 761Kbs -and that only happened once. The other six times I tested over the last three months it was right at 200Kbs
^ What he said. Never heard of a speed cap. That would blow. I saw just about 6mbps yesterday in a good area so I know its not capped at 4.9.
The data cap however is 5GB/mo, and I am throttled to 0.06mbps on my regular tmo APN as a result of going over. Thankfully we have a workaround for the throttle using a different tmo APN.
Cap or hardware limitation? The highest I've personally seen on mine is 6.02 down. I'm pretty sure the hardware limitation is about 7
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
The Samsung Vibrant has a maximum network speed of 7.2Mbps. Which is the equivalent of like 800-900 kb/s actual download speed. I live in Tacoma, Washington and my speedtest is usually around 6 or so Mbps. So even without the "4G" it's still damn fast. Considering most home internet connections are around 2.7-4.2 Mbps.
mdof1337 said:
The Samsung Vibrant has a maximum network speed of 7.2Mbps. Which is the equivalent of like 800-900 kb/s actual download speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How do you figure?
The only thing I can figure is that you are confusing Kilo Bits per second with Kilo Bytes per second and failing to use the correct labels to differentiate between them. A Byte is 8 Bits so 7.2Kbs is 900KBs, however you stated Mbs which still puts you off by 1000bps. That is a full Meg per second off and 5 X more than I get over the air just in your error margin.
14Mb per sec on wifi...
I have 20Mb service at home and the fastest that my vibrant will download at is 14.4Mb
On 3G the fastest i've hit was a little over 5Mb. It's funny that my 3G phone is almost as fast as Verizon's 4G which they're showing as 7Mb. Verizon's 3G on my DroidX has never hit speeds over 1Mb. Sad. My 3G phone is as fast as Sprints 4G. Lol.
T313C0mun1s7 said:
How do you figure?
The only thing I can figure is that you are confusing Kilo Bits per second with Kilo Bytes per second and failing to use the correct labels to differentiate between them. A Byte is 8 Bits so 7.2Kbs is 900KBs, however you stated Mbs which still puts you off by 1000bps. That is a full Meg per second off and 5 X more than I get over the air just in your error margin.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nah I think he's right. 7.2 Mb's = .09MB (almost 1MB per second) 1Mb = 1/8MB so he was right when he said 900KB although he put kb (lowercase)
For instance at home on my 20Mb connection I can only really download at 2.5MB's per second.
**edit** looks like VZW's LTE should be able to hit 42Mb's but no phone out right now will come anywhere near those speeds.
I love how this has turned into a nerdier version of the "their/there/they're" argument.
That being said, technically the k should be lower case, not uppercase.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
mdof1337 said:
The Samsung Vibrant has a maximum network speed of 7.2Mbps. Which is the equivalent of like 800-900 kb/s actual download speed. I live in Tacoma, Washington and my speedtest is usually around 6 or so Mbps. So even without the "4G" it's still damn fast. Considering most home internet connections are around 2.7-4.2 Mbps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where do you live in Tacoma where you actually get hspa+? I'm in University Place and I have to go up to Renton to get hspa+ service. Then again I've been out of town for about 2 weeks. I also don't know anyone with that ****ty of a home internet connection in a populated area. I hear you though, maybe in other places or bad carriers :shrug:
Basic internet from Comcast:
Download Speed: 23390 kbps (2923.8 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 2238 kbps (279.8 KB/sec transfer rate)
Download Speed: 23522 kbps (2940.3 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 2262 kbps (282.8 KB/sec transfer rate)
I have 35/35 FiOS at home, I see 43/38 on my pc and 20/12 to my vibrant connected via wifi to a ubiquiti nanostation loco m 2.4 n 2x2 mimo. Those speeds are in megabits. I used speedtest.net on pc, and their app on my phone. Im in the philadelphia area and I choose the washington dc.test server. I also use pf altq(hfsc) on my firewall for QoS fwiw.
Running nerov3 tw edition
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S - powered by Team Whiskey™
Could we please stop talking about what speeds you guys are getting? I am in the Boise Idaho market and I get 3Mbps out of the 5Mbps advertised. Oh, and I pay $60 a month for it. You are all making me depressed.
Forgot to mention using voodoo enabled. Also whe my phone was stock I couldnt seem to break 4mbit on the upload, the download wasnt as good as it is now but I cant recall the exact speed, but the upload really bugged me
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S - powered by Team Whiskey™
T313C0mun1s7 said:
Could we please stop talking about what speeds you guys are getting? I am in the Boise Idaho market and I get 3Mbps out of the 5Mbps advertised. Oh, and I pay $60 a month for it. You are all making me depressed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bet you get great mashed potatos and potato soup mmmmm
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S - powered by Team Whiskey™
jbeez said:
I bet you get great mashed potatos and potato soup mmmmm
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S - powered by Team Whiskey™
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope. It is a cash crop, so all the best stuff is shipped out. It is not like living in Maine and getting the best crab or whatever, the buyer purchase full crops.
T313C0mun1s7 said:
Could we please stop talking about what speeds you guys are getting? I am in the Boise Idaho market and I get 3Mbps out of the 5Mbps advertised. Oh, and I pay $60 a month for it. You are all making me depressed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
really? cableone i'm guessing? that sucks. i get solid 10Mbps down from them for like $55-60/month including modem rental.
best i've got on tmob network is about 4.5Mbps down (no hspa+ here, yet). looking through my history i've got 11.5/5.8 down/up at boise state on wifi, 9.55/1.05 at home, but i think i've got better at boise state before.
funeralthirst said:
really? cableone i'm guessing? that sucks. i get solid 10Mbps down from them for like $55-60/month including modem rental.
best i've got on tmob network is about 4.5Mbps down (no hspa+ here, yet). looking through my history i've got 11.5/5.8 down/up at boise state on wifi, 9.55/1.05 at home, but i think i've got better at boise state before.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Caldwell, yes Cable One. Are you one of their fiber customers? That is not available out here yet. The only other time I have seen Cable one offer 10Mb was to business customers, and that is a totally different subsidiarity of Cable One.
Edit: I just checked their packages and it looks like they have changed them. Still, if they can't provide my full rate now I would just be paying more for the same connection. I am in an old bundle.
T313C0mun1s7 said:
Caldwell, yes Cable One. Are you one of their fiber customers? That is not available out here yet. The only other time I have seen Cable one offer 10Mb was to business customers, and that is a totally different subsidiarity of Cable One.
Edit: I just checked their packages and it looks like they have changed them. Still, if they can't provide my full rate now I would just be paying more for the same connection. I am in an old bundle.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, it's just updated and doesn't cost much more, same modem and everything i just called and upgraded. then i wasn't getting much for improved speeds so i called them and evidently the line to my house somehow got mangled so they replaced it (free). i'd call them and ***** if you aren't getting your speeds because i almost always get full 10 down regardless of peak hours.
but sadly qwest is cheaper and faster, but where i live (sw boise) qwest doesn't even offer service so cableone is my only non-dialup/non-clear option. but cableone hasn't been too bad, for internet at least, tv and customer service is a whole other issue. lol.
ive pulled 6mb down when i tether it to my ps3 to play online.
[EDIT] Some posters have responded that the assumptions made below are unrealistic as regards the average subscriber. That is absolutely true! This OP is unrelated to the "average subscriber." The thread is about the disconnect between the data download volume required by high-bandwidth apps being advertised by the carriers and the cummulative monthly data volume permitted by the carriers. I.e., this post would be valid if there were zero subscribers using these services. I would note, however, that these ideas will become increasingly applicable to the average subscriber as subscribers begin to use the cited services in greater volumes.
Other posters have commented that the 2 mbps assumption in this OP is unrealistically high. Please see posts 52, 54, and 75 for calculations related to actual apps that use similar bandwidths.
There has been much contraversy surrounding TMO's throttling network access speeds after a subscriber uses (or downloads?) 5 GB of data. Also, some people seem to be confused as to the meaning of the associated terms "bandwidth," "download speed," "total monthly usage," etc. This post is simply an attempt to clarify these terms and to add perspective to the issue.
I will use an (imprecise) analogy to household electrical power usage. The quantity of electrical power (measured in kilowatts), consumed at any point in time depends upon the sum of the current draw of the appliances, fixtures, machinery, etc. operating at that point in time. (Although power = voltage multiplied by current, the power company keeps the voltage relatively constant.)
Wireless data downloads can be considered as analogous to electrical power consumption if we analogize maximum link speed (also referred to as bandwidth) to voltage and bit flow to current. The power company maintains a (relatively constant) voltage to enable us to pull a variable amount of current according to our needs. A carrier maintains a (variable) amount of bandwidth to enable us to transfer a variable amount of data according to our needs.
Kilowatts and bits/second are both instantaeous values. So, the electric meter must continuously meter the current as it flows through the meter to sum the total energy used (kilowatt-hours). Likewise, TMO (apparently) implements a meter on their servers for each subscriber to monitor data flow over the course of a billing month.
Now, this is where the analogy gets interesting.
The power company charges per usage while TMO advertises and charges a flat monthly rate (assuming an "unlimited" data plan). On the surface (read: "as advertised"), the TMO plan sounds better. One is able to plan for a fixed monthly expenditure without having to worry about consumption. That is very appealing, because TMO has also heavily marketed their newer and ever-faster networks as well as devices and services requiring these greater bandwidths.
But notice what happens when a customer attempts to aggressively use the new devices, services, and supporting network bandwidths. When the data throttling hammer comes down, Internet data services are simply terminated until the beginning of the next billing month, for most practical purposes! (The modern Internet is largely non-functional at 56 kb.)
How would such behaviour play out with household energy consumption per our analogy? Say the power company initiates a big marketing campaign to place equipment and services in your home that require lots of power to operate, and sets you up on a flat monthly fee. To accommodate the new equipment and services, the power company drops 10kV service to your home. The first month, You use the new, very power-hungry equipment and services for 5-6 hours. By then, you have used 20,000 kwH. The power company's policy is to throttle users who reach 20,000 kwH. So what do they do? According to the analogy, they decrease the voltage to your house to 20 volts. Of course, 20 volts is not enough to run anything except perhaps enough to make a couple of light bulbs flicker. However, the power company can say that, technically, they have not breached their obligation to supply you unlimited power for a fixed fee. If you can do something with 20 volts for the remainder of the billing month, have at it!
For both the power company and a wireless carrier, these are peak loading problems. The difference is that the power company builds out the infrastructure necessary to handle peak loading for all of its customers, big and small.
A wireless data carrier can "build out" in two dimensions, speed and capacity. These are related but different quantities. Say TMO replaces transceiver technology on a tower. Say the old system had 4 transceivers, each capable of handling 1000 subscribers and providing data speeds of between 500kbps and 5 Mbps to each subscriber depending upon the number of data users connected to that tower. Now assume that the upgrade has five transceivers, each capable of handling 1000 subscribers. New technolgoy coding techniques now render a transceiver capable of providing data speeds of 1-21 Mbps, depending upon the number of data uses connected to that transceiver and their data requirements, etc. In this scenario, the carrier could do fancy marketing to pull in additional subscribers and some users would in fact sometimes see faster downloads. However, the carrier might not have accomplished much from a capacity standpoint in this scenario. E.g., tripling the number of 3G radios might be better from a capacity standpoint than replacing the existing 3G radios with 4G radios. However, the latter is much sexier from a marketing standpoint.
We will know when TMO has finally built out sufficient capacity to satisfy the data demand that they themselves create by hyping speed and speed-requiring services such as TMO-TV; because at that point there will be no further need for data caps and they will be removed or increased to higher thresholds. In the meantime, the following calculation is an indication of the amount of "unlimited" nework access we currently receive from TMO in exchange for our $80 - $100:
What is your average download speed? Of course it varies from region to region and from one moment to the next. Let us just pick some reasonable number as an average to work with, say 2 mbps. Consider that average and the 5 GB data cap. For quick calculation purposes, let us consider 10 bits/byte. (The real number is ~9 bits/byte after taking into account error correction overhead, etc.)
(5 x 10E9 Bytes) x (10 bits/byte) = 5 x 10E10 bits
(5 x 10E10 bits) / (2 x 10E6 bits/sec) = 25000 seconds
(25,000 seconds) / (3600 seconds/hr) = 6.9 hours
In conclusion: An "unlimited" TMO data plan provides about 7 hours of [clarification: high bandwidth application] access monthly, based upon advertised and provided speeds, before one is cut off from useful data access. Your available number of hours will vary according to the data speeds that you experience/utilize.
There are ~720 hours in a month. Thus, our carrier's plan provides for 2 mbps use of our phone about 1% of the time or about 25 minutes per day.
If you understand and are happy with this (as many no doubt are), wonderful! I believe that a subscriber should at least be aware of what he/she is getting for his/her $80-$100 per month, though; and the carriers should, but do not, disclose this information.
The only grip I have about it is, I wished it was cheaper, maybe $20-25 (i know about the loyalty plan but I haven't gotten time to ask about it). Or offer a $15 2gb plan (as opposed to the janky $10/15 200mb plan)
Unlimited means..
1. Having no restrictions or controls.
2. Having or seeming to have no boundaries; infinite.
3. Without qualification or exception; absolute.
This is what Unlimited mean,not the twisted version T-mobile trick some into believe,Unlimited mean no restrictions no controls,you can't abuse something that is presented to you in Unlimited form period.
I don't know why people have no sue T-mobile for this.
eltormo said:
Unlimited means..
1. Having no restrictions or controls.
2. Having or seeming to have no boundaries; infinite.
3. Without qualification or exception; absolute.
This is what Unlimited mean,not the twisted version T-mobile trick some into believe,Unlimited mean no restrictions no controls,you can't abuse something that is presented to you in Unlimited form period.
I don't know why people have no sue T-mobile for this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who says unlimited means no restrictions and no controls? Unlimited defines whether there is a limit or not, not how you use the internet.
As for the OP, I regularly tether and use my phone and still haven't hit the 5 GB limit (downloading apps/games on my phone, roms, kernels, streaming Pandora, forum browsing on my laptop and youtube streaming).
The one's that get over the 5GB limit are probably doing things that they shouldn't be doing so imo it's fair and I would rather have it set to 5GB than having them raise rates for everybody and offer real unlimited.
not satisfied, but not upset. had i not streamed the entire super bowl through my phone, my data wouldn't be throttled right now!
my bad
ahem
Umm....
Cap ?
sahil04 said:
Who says unlimited means no restrictions and no controls? Unlimited defines whether there is a limit or not, not how you use the internet.
As for the OP, I regularly tether and use my phone and still haven't hit the 5 GB limit (downloading apps/games on my phone, roms, kernels, streaming Pandora, forum browsing on my laptop and youtube streaming).
The one's that get over the 5GB limit are probably doing things that they shouldn't be doing so imo it's fair and I would rather have it set to 5GB than having them raise rates for everybody and offer real unlimited.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know i just quoted a dictionary definition of Unlimited right one of them is having not restrictions or controls.?
Maybe you know more than the dudes who wrote the dictionary maybe we should go by your terms and not what the real definition means.
In fact the terms i quote are not referring to the Internet.
Stop lying dude i download 3 gameloft games,and watched some video on youtube and i landed over 1 GB in just 3 days,games from the android market like gameloft ones are close to 300 MB,i have spiderman,SplinterCell and GT racing and with those 3 alone i got close to 900MB.
In fact i made a test and watched several videos on youtube,and did some download without tethering,and i landed on 1.3 GB in just 3 days,and i did not even tether dude,stop acting like 5GB is allot if not,in fact not even close to be that much 5GB is nothing this days,i have video on my Galaxy S that are 53MB just for a 3 and half minute video,just head over to youtube and see how much data and actual good quality video takes.
In fact i have Temperature by Sean Paul and is 53 MB,10 miserable video like that one,that is what enough to get you what an hour of entertainment or less,and you have 500MB is just 1 hours of watching videos,use it 2 hours and you have 1GB already eat up.
5GB is nothing.
In fact roms alone are 130+ MB,some are close or over 200 MB,download 7 of those on 1 week and you already have close to 1GB use,just for roms.
Your math doesn't add up,and even without tethering 5GB is nothing.
But show me what we should not be doing,since phones like the mytouch 4G are also throttle and those are advertise as video phones (not that the Vibrant can't do that) and as a wireless hub,where other devices can connect to you,(again no that the Vibrant can't do that either),so in the end you have a service that is been advertise as unlimited,only to be punish for using it,Verizon did the same thing and was force to settle in cash.
I read now that T-mobile was sue for this as well,i don't think the outcome will be any different than what happen with Verizon.
I like the dictionary version of what Unlimited means,not your or T-mobile twisted version,you most work for T-mobile you have to,to actually cheer for such a scam,and to accuse others of wrong doing,when the features all this phones have are bandwidth demanding.
Tmobile
I like Tmobile
n2ishun said:
Umm....
Cap ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what's this a picture of?
eltormo said:
Unlimited means..
1. Having no restrictions or controls.
2. Having or seeming to have no boundaries; infinite.
3. Without qualification or exception; absolute.
This is what Unlimited mean,not the twisted version T-mobile trick some into believe,Unlimited mean no restrictions no controls,you can't abuse something that is presented to you in Unlimited form period.
I don't know why people have no sue T-mobile for this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, that is what "unlimited" means. You got the adjective right but I believe that you may be misunderstanding the noun. "Unlimited" must modify something; it cannot be analyzed by itself. if you read the fine print you will see that TMO promises unlimited Internet access, not unlimited Internet access at any particular speed. Thus (they claim), they continue to supply "unlimited" Internet access at 56kb after switching on the cap. That is, you may download any amount of data possible at 56kb. They may not even promise that. They may simply talk in terms of an "unlimited plan," which is marketing sizzle that means essentially nothing, except perhaps suggesting an absence of up-charges.
It seems that you may be suggesting that TMO promises unlimited access at any speed. That would not make sense, of course, because they are not physically capable of providing "any speed." So, what bandwidth are you buying when you sign up with a carrier? Well, essentially you are buying into an uncertain, imaginary bandwidth. By that I mean that in your own mind you imagine/hope what the bandwidth will be like, based upon that carrier's generally-stated advertising, PR releases, reputation, etc. At the current state of the wireless art, a carrier will not promise a retail customer any particular bandwidth.
That is where the "trick" lies and how unpleasant surprises arise. The carriers speak out of two sides of their mouth. One side is the advertising, PR, press releases, etc. which suggest certain bandwidth availability by making references to services (movie downloads, Internet TV, etc.) that require such bandwidth availability. The other side of their mouths is the retail subscriber contract terms which suggest just the opposite. That is, regular use of the bandwidths suggested in the PR constitutes punishable abuse.
These are untenable, contradictory positions that will likely not persist for much longer (JMO). Unfortunately, the short-term "fix" could be a metering scheme that is even worse. If they take that route, though, their ad campaign might take a big hit, as they would likely have to abandon terms like "unlimited."
It may be helpful to keep in mind what the wireless carrier business really is. A carrier spends billions of dollars to purchase spectral bandwidth from the US government. That carrier then spends additional billions of dollars to build out a network which enables them to repackage the spectral bandwidth as voice/data bandwidth to sell at retail. Like any other business, a wireless carrier will attempt to sell its service (repackaged bandwidth) for as high a price as the market will allow. Understanding this is the key to understanding why a carrier will laugh all the way to the bank when a fixed price, high-bandwidth customer threatens to cancel their contract and/or take their business elsewhere. If that happens, the carrier will simply resell that bandwidth to two or more new customers who may be smaller bandwidth consumers. Following such a transaction, the carrier will have replaced $80 per month of revenue with $160 $240 or more of monthly revenue.
Please note that my writings in this or any other XDA threads are simply personal opinions relating to public matters and are specifically not intended as statements of fact or advice. Any references to particular carriers are intended as examples only and could be applicable to any carrier.
Interesting Poll
The poll at the top of the page is interesting. At this point, at least, the extremes of "very satisfied" and "completely dissatisfied" are fairly evenly split.
Please vote if you have not already done so.
I am sure T-Mobile will double the cap pretty soon, and $30 ($25 with EM+) internet will have tethering included in the near future because AT&T is pressing hard on the new 4G smartphone + tethering pricing:
$45 with 4GB and tethering, and $10 per GB overage.
zbt1985 said:
what's this a picture of?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
121 gigs of transfer over Tmo in the last 31 days ?
BruceElliott said:
Yes, that is what "unlimited" means. unlimited Internet access, not unlimited Internet access at any particular speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think if even YOU (a Tmobile shill) will look at it, limiting internet speed is still LIMITING.
My contract states in clear language, UNLIMITED INTERNET ACCESS.
They have tried to force me to change that contract many times.
Many many times.
I will not change it, or allow them to change it, it is a binding contract.
Yes, they offer free phones and minutes and even freemonths for me to change it...NFW, ain't happenin.
n2ishun said:
I think if even YOU (a Tmobile shill) will look at it, limiting internet speed is still LIMITING.
My contract states in clear language, UNLIMITED INTERNET ACCESS.
They have tried to force me to change that contract many times.
Many many times.
I will not change it, or allow them to change it, it is a binding contract.
Yes, they offer free phones and minutes and even freemonths for me to change it...NFW, ain't happenin.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A T-Mobile shill? You must not be reading my posts very carefully... LOL!
n2ishun said:
121 gigs of transfer over Tmo in the last 31 days ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No; that is an application associated with a BitTorrent client that simply keeps track of Internet usage. Not sure how it is applicable to this thread, given that TMO provides the same information for TMO's wireless service.
mingkee said:
I am sure T-Mobile will double the cap pretty soon, and $30 ($25 with EM+) internet will have tethering included in the near future because AT&T is pressing hard on the new 4G smartphone + tethering pricing:
$45 with 4GB and tethering, and $10 per GB overage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be good. Let's hope that you are correct.
I pay good money for my data plan. And it is indeed very limited.
I had a talk with T-mobile on Twitter back when it was announced about the HSPA+ speeds and said why is there a cap after 5gb and I used the 21mb/s and gave them all the calculations as to how quickly that 5gb would get used up. I asked why give us faster speeds when you could be investing our money into expanding the network giving 3G speeds to areas stuck on EDGE or have no coverage from T-mobile. Their only response was stay tuned for what we have in store for our customers.
Yes throttling speed that is done purposely by T-mobile makes it not unlimited. If it was simply limited to the speed that you can get given where you are using your phone at then that would mean unlimited.
Scoobyracing03 said:
I had a talk with T-mobile on Twitter back when it was announced about the HSPA+ speeds and said why is there a cap after 5gb and I used the 21mb/s and gave them all the calculations as to how quickly that 5gb would get used up. I asked why give us faster speeds when you could be investing our money into expanding the network giving 3G speeds to areas stuck on EDGE or have no coverage from T-mobile. Their only response was stay tuned for what we have in store for our customers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, you clearly anticipated what my OP is about when you communicated with TMO. Let's hope that the person who suggested that you "stay tuned" was well-informed!
I imagine that the early build-out in the speed dimension was a marketing tool designed to capture customers based upon the "wow" factor of enormous speed. However, a carrier who does not quickly follow this angle up with building out in the capacity dimension will (and has) disappoint(ed) customers and will likely fall flat on their face. Wireless carriers are, of course, a limited monopoly, limited by available spectral bandwidth constraints and huge investment costs. We in the U.S. are fortunate to at least have a few carriers to compete for customers. Hopefully that competition will be sufficient to continue to drive investment in capacity. If not, the public sector can always step in... At the end of the day, the freqency spectrum, like the air we breath, is owned by the people. We may lease it out. We may also cancel leases for the public good...
Looks like John Legere just said, "hahaha sucka.. you've been baited to our unlimited data cap"
It has come to our attention over the past few days – thanks to a couple of our readers – that T-Mobile has changed the fine print to its unlimited 4G LTE Simple Choice plans. Head on over to the individual plans or family plans page on T-Mobile’s website and you’ll see the following short line added at the bottom of the page:
“*Unlimited 4G LTE customers who use more than 21 GB of data in a bill cycle will have their data usage de-prioritized compared to other customers for that bill cycle at locations and times when competing network demands occur, resulting in relatively slower speeds.”
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.tmonews.com/2015/06/21gb...mobiles-unlimited-4g-lte-simple-choice-plans/
What are you thoughts?
I avg 35-45gb a month. But how do we know if our area is congested?
Legere has been bashing other companies about their throttle, but yet he's doing the same thing.
twe90kid said:
What are you thoughts?
I avg 35-45gb a month.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What and how much are you downloading?
twe90kid said:
Looks like John Legere just said, "hahaha sucka.. you've been baited to our unlimited data cap"
http://www.tmonews.com/2015/06/21gb...mobiles-unlimited-4g-lte-simple-choice-plans/
What are you thoughts?
I avg 35-45gb a month. But how do we know if our area is congested?
Legere has been bashing other companies about their throttle, but yet he's doing the same thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not trying to pick a fight, but I'd like to hear how you consistently use that much data on your phone. I'd consider myself a heavy user, and I do break the tethering rules a few times a week, and I don't think I've ever passed 20GB in a month.
ummduh said:
Not trying to pick a fight, but I'd like to hear how you consistently use that much data on your phone. I'd consider myself a heavy user, and I do break the tethering rules a few times a week, and I don't think I've ever passed 20GB in a month.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A fight it is, lol. But seriously is not about how much data someone's uses but if this is true then it's the fact that John goes around bashing AT&T and Verizon but then pulls this $hit. How much data you use is non of my business but have you ever watch a 5 min YouTube video in 1080 or 1440? There goes about half a Gb.
ummduh said:
Not trying to pick a fight, but I'd like to hear how you consistently use that much data on your phone. I'd consider myself a heavy user, and I do break the tethering rules a few times a week, and I don't think I've ever passed 20GB in a month.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Breaking 30 - 40 GB is easy depending where you are. Last year I took a family vacation to Disney World and forgot to bring my laptop to store each days videos and pictures. At the time I had a G3 and wife had a Note 3.
At the end of the day our phones would be out of storage when recording videos in 4K and taking pictures in max resolution. Our only two options for making storage space available was to either buy storage for our phones or to upload everything to google drive, dropbox, youtube, box .... Having the unlimited dataplan, why not use it and just upload everything each night so we can clear our phones the next day. Doing this over five days four nights we used over 80 GB of data combined (all videos ended up on youtube while phones were saved in the cloud.
We are going to Disney and Universal in a couple weeks and I plan on doing this again. Outside of special occasions like this, I think we used between 6 and 10 GB combined a month.
moehagene said:
Breaking 30 - 40 GB is easy depending where you are. Last year I took a family vacation to Disney World and forgot to bring my laptop to store each days videos and pictures. At the time I had a G3 and wife had a Note 3.
At the end of the day our phones would be out of storage when recording videos in 4K and taking pictures in max resolution. Our only two options for making storage space available was to either buy storage for our phones or to upload everything to google drive, dropbox, youtube, box .... Having the unlimited dataplan, why not use it and just upload everything each night so we can clear our phones the next day. Doing this over five days four nights we used over 80 GB of data combined (all videos ended up on youtube while phones were saved in the cloud.
We are going to Disney and Universal in a couple weeks and I plan on doing this again. Outside of special occasions like this, I think we used between 6 and 10 GB combined a month.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup.
With a rooted phone and having xposed. My youtube is set to play 1440P as long as it's available.
I also upload my 4k videos that I record at car events.
Photos that you take are about 5mb each (16mp).
Just streaming music and video daily will easily eat 21 GB in less than two weeks. I have a feeling this might get repealed or changed to 31. At least that's a gig a day. It's kinda hypocritical like people have said. There's some interesting comments on tmonews under the article. This will really screw the commuters in big cities plus those who listen to music or videos via headphones at work etc. I guess we really need to see how it goes because there are a few unanswered questions here like what are the peak times and if this changes from tower to tower after depriorization. We'll have to just see how this affects people.
sino8r said:
Just streaming music and video daily will easily eat 21 GB in less than two weeks. I have a feeling this might get repealed or changed to 31. At least that's a gig a day. It's kinda hypocritical like people have said. There's some interesting comments on tmonews under the article. This will really screw the commuters in big cities plus those who listen to music or videos via headphones at work etc. I guess we really need to see how it goes because there are a few unanswered questions here like what are the peak times and if this changes from tower to tower after depriorization. We'll have to just see how this affects people.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I still like to know what the deprioritize speed is.. for example, if you hit 21gb. And your in a congested area, what speed are you capped at? 1mbps? 5mbps? 10mbps?
Also, does it mean that if we jump from one network to another network, the prioritizing stops? What happens if we go back to the original network, does it start again?
twe90kid said:
I still like to know what the deprioritize speed is.. for example, if you hit 21gb. And your in a congested area, what speed are you capped at? 1mbps? 5mbps? 10mbps?
Also, does it mean that if we jump from one network to another network, the prioritizing stops? What happens if we go back to the original network, does it start again?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly... Not sure. Some people in the comments on tmonews are clarifying some of those concerns. But really it just seems like speculation so far. I guess we'll see... Not really happy about this myself.
I wouldn't get too upset about it. A good network always has a QOS system in place.
Note that the statement says 'de-prioritized', not throttled. Instead of assigning your account to a lower bandwidth speed, you could be placed in a lower tier in a packet queuing scheduler. This doesn't necessarily limit your bandwidth, it just lets other user's packets go first. When an area is 100% congested, your 'share' of the bandwidth will be less than others. Once there is free network capacity your bandwidth would go back to normal as there would be enough free resources to do so. Realize that network saturation changes by the second, so unless a congested area is constantly overloaded at 100% capacity, you shouldn't experience much speed reduction.
This is completely within the new FCC rules, and is actually a good network management practice.
xanmato said:
I wouldn't get too upset about it. A good network always has a QOS system in place.
Note that the statement says 'de-prioritized', not throttled. Instead of assigning your account to a lower bandwidth speed, you could be placed in a lower tier in a packet queuing scheduler. This doesn't necessarily limit your bandwidth, it just lets other user's packets go first. When an area is 100% congested, your 'share' of the bandwidth will be less than others. Once there is free network capacity your bandwidth would go back to normal as there would be enough free resources to do so. Realize that network saturation changes by the second, so unless a congested area is constantly overloaded at 100% capacity, you shouldn't experience much speed reduction.
This is completely within the new FCC rules, and is actually a good network management practice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah it's good in theory (compared to plain throttling) but we haven't really seen it in practical application so far. I live in medium sized city (300 thousand city/1 million metro) and don't have much to worry about really. I have WiFi at work/home and no real excuse to use 60GB a month like I do. Just bad habits. I just have to remember to leave WiFi on lol! No biggie for me. The folks I feel bad for is those who work outside or have no WiFi in office (other than work purposes. Strick company policy a holes etc) and/or commuters that have to ride the subway. I don't really feel sorry for those (and I have a few friends like this) that are too cheap to buy broadband Internet at home. This isn't meant to be a replacement for home Internet unless you have a Hotspot device or whatever they call it these days. I get that. I guess we'll have to see. This plan has been in place a few weeks now. We'll have to see how much it affects people. Hopefully not too much. Good reply though! Clarification is always welcome here:good:
sino8r said:
Yeah it's good in theory (compared to plain throttling) but we haven't really seen it in practical application so far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, until we get some technical info or some really good test results, we won't know exactly what they are using. Though priority queuing and class based queuing are common in today's networks. I can guarantee they are already using hierarchical fair service curves as it is pretty much required for the HD voice feature to be reliable.
If this system is already in place, then they probably are not using regular throttling tiers, as I am well past the soft cap and am still putting down 80/20 speed. Though I am most likely in an un-congested area. I am wondering just how weighted the de-prioritization scale is for users above the cap.
I use alot of data (70gb) one month that was the most extreme. I download alot of movies and torrents while i sleep. Theres know doubt in my mind that they mess with my speeds especially during peak hours. I with search and get lte then 5 seconds later it drops down. I will search and get it again and the same thing will happen. Meanwhile my wifes phone stays on lte. I also noticed at times ill be on lte but will only be downloading at 100 or 200 kbs where im normally at 1 mbs. But like i said it's usually only at peak hours and lasts for 30min to a hour
twe90kid said:
Looks like John Legere just said, "hahaha sucka.. you've been baited to our unlimited data cap"
http://www.tmonews.com/2015/06/21gb...mobiles-unlimited-4g-lte-simple-choice-plans/
What are you thoughts?
I avg 35-45gb a month. But how do we know if our area is congested?
Legere has been bashing other companies about their throttle, but yet he's doing the same thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait, this is just now making news? That's been in their fine print for almost a year now ever since they started their unlimited data campaign.
I average about 150-200GBs a month on my line alone. I really heavily on my phones data for everything I do while I'm not at home. Sometimes even when I'm home I'll use data just for the heck of it.
T-Mobile is throttling but not as rampant as the other carriers. T-Mobile's throttling depends on network congestion. Other carriers just throttle once you hit a certain number.
There really isn't a way to tell though if your area is heavily congested unless it's a major city; i.e Denver Metro, Manhattan, LA, etc etc.
I am very torn by this as I live in a congested neighborhood that this cap is designed to manage. The tower that serves my neighborhood is oversold. I routinely suffer from slow network speeds on the best of days and I personally have never used enough data to hit the cap. So on one hand, I certainly want my fellow users capped if they are data hogs as bandwidth is very constrained in my local neck of the woods. On the other hand, because my tower is so congested, if I did hit the cap and was de-prioritized, I would immediately hit 2G speeds because there is so much traffic to compete with. So T-Mobile has essentially told me that I have a 21GB data plan as in my neighborhood I will never get more.
With that figure in mind, I have to say that a 15GB plan from Verizon that actually would give me decent speed now seems not so far off from my 21GB "unlimited" plan. T-Mobile is supposed to be adding bandwidth in my neighborhood, but it is no longer a comparison of XGB vs unlimited, but XGB vs 21GB. Verizon and for that matter, Sprint (yes, I know) are offering competitive packages to 21GB and it is possible that even Sprint may give me faster speeds. I am not so sure that I may not make the jump to someone if they can deliver better speeds. For those that live in non-congested neighborhoods, that 21GB cap may never be seen. But in my area, that is a wall.
They are doing what Verizon started doing. Throttling only on congested towers to the top data people. I use to get throttled by Verizon when the Detroit Lions or the Tigers were playing since I work downtown Detroit. Once the games were done I would get better data speeds.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
Using over 80gb a month is taking advantage of a good thing. People who consistently abuse the data limits are the same people who screwed this for everyone. These are the people who feel entitled to abuse every inch they can. Hotels have wifi, there are other ways. I have the unlimited data package fir years, never abused the privilege. Whenever at home I use my wifi even though I have sick DL speeds at home. I will never abuse a situation, just the way I am.
Sent from my Note 4.
So sorry that us heavy users misunderstood what unlimited means. Dangit I knew I should have paid more attention in vocabulary class.
Now I just need to remember not to buy that nice car I want because that would taking advantage of a good thing as others aren't buying it.
Not to step on anyone posting, but I believe that T-Mobile is at fault here. Notwithstanding the individuals that break the rules and tether more than the rules allow, T-Mobile sold me an unlimited plan. I have not exceeded the 21GB limit. My data, according to T-Mobile, is at 11GB. But when I subscribed to the unlimited plan, I asked what that meant and I gave some far out there examples (streaming videos 24 hours a day, etc.). I was told by the T-Mobile customer rep, unlimited means unlimited. No sweat.
The problem is that T-Mobile wanted to attract more business and they used and still use unlimited data plans to attract that business and their network wasn't really ready for that level of activity. I read comments to an article as much as 6 months ago that had users saying that T-Mobile's network was, unlike the other carrier's networks, impervious to slowdowns from added traffic which is simply not true.
But I believe T-Mobile has helped build that impression with the selling all of these unlimited data packages. TMONews had an article a couple of weeks ago asking if unlimited data packages are going away and they quoted John Legere saying that unlimited data packages are only guaranteed for 2 more years. (http://www.tmonews.com/2015/05/is-unlimited-data-going-to-disappear/) Then shortly after they announced this cap. The article's point is that unlimited packages are unsustainable. But T-Mobile keeps selling the idea. All carrier's need to sell what they can provide and not promise more than they can deliver. Perhaps they should say no to a new customer that lives in a neighborhood that is oversold. But they won't.
I love T-Mobile, but I experience very slow speeds due to a wildly oversold network. I would have been much better off if T-Mobile only promised what they can deliver. They can't really deliver unlimited to me. What they told me last week is that unlimited is actually 21GB, if you could get 21GB at the slow download speeds they are currently delivering. For the fellow that got 80GB, if he followed the rules, he is paying for an unlimited plan. In my neighborhood, except for DSL that is unusably slow, I have no other options except wireless. No cable, nothing. I am willing to pay for my data needs. But I want and need the data at reasonably fast speeds. It is not clear that in my neighborhood that T-Mobile can deliver. But now that the cap is in place, T-Mobile has made the comparison clearer. Who can deliver 21GB faster, cheaper and more reliably than anyone else. Because in my oversold neighborhood, 21GB is all that I will get. YMMV.
Good luck finding another carrier that will only delay your packets after 21gb when there is congestion instead of crippling access all together. Your situation is unique and the result should be expected. There is nothing a carrier can do if your area is under serviced when it comes to internet access. xanmato completely gets the concept here. This is not a cap, even calling it a soft cap is a bit much. This is Quality of Service (QOS) at its best and T-Mobile shouldnt be slammed for doing this. Just because its unlimited doesn't mean you can go ahead and use it as your sole internet source for everything you ever do. That was never its intended purpose. If everyone used 80gb a month it would cripple any cellular network unless the heavy users had some kind of consequence and maybe make them use their wifi for once. Maybe in the future the cell network or whatever comes after that will be robust enough to handle everyone using large amounts of bandwidth at once but until then we have to respect the fact that a cellular carrier is not the same thing as an ISP