Verizon Caves In, 'Unlimited' Data Incoming

[Suika]

(click for source)

 

That's right, boys, the big men in suits have finally figured out why they might be bleeding subscribers to the likes of T-Mobile and Sprint. Could it be because they're the only damned major US carrier without unlimited data options? That's my suspicion at least, as Verizon has announced, starting February 13th, they will be offering unlimited data.

Quote

Unlimited data on the Verizon network has arrived. Beginning Monday, Verizon is offering an introductory plan that gives you unlimited data on your smartphone and tablet on the best 4G LTE network in the country. With Verizon Unlimited, you also get HD video streaming, Mobile Hotspot, calling and texting to Mexico and Canada and up to 500 MB/day of 4G LTE roaming in Mexico and Canada - included.

Much like the other carriers that like to toss around the word 'unlimited,' there are limits to this unlimited data plan. Now you might be thinking at this point, "now that's an oxymoron," and you'd be correct! However, that seems to be the movement the major US carriers are taking, for those less informed, but I digress. 

 

Similar to their competitors, upon reaching the 22GB threshold, Verizon will be "prioritizing traffic behind other customers." Whether or not Verizon will blatantly throttle these heavy users without rhyme or reason *cough*AT&T*cough* is unknown yet, but still, the pricing isn't too bad. There is also the mention of 'HD video streaming,' which makes me believe Verizon will be forcibly throttling video streams in favor of other data. Not unheard of, but I'm a little upset Verizon is making no attempt to set their plan apart from the competition, other than reading from a script while held at gun point shouting "Oh, our network is so good! Nobody can compete with us!"

Quote

$80 for unlimited data, talk and text on your smartphone with paper-free billing and AutoPay.

$45 per line for four lines with unlimited data, talk and text on your smartphones and tablets with paper-free billing and AutoPay.

That essentially sums it up for this article, however I would like to point out statements made earlier last year by Verizon's CFO, Fran Shammo. In fact, I liked these statements so much, I had to verify if he was still CFO, and funnily enough, he's not.

Quote

"At the end of the day, people don't need unlimited plans," said Shammo.

 

This is not the first time Shammo has rejected the idea of offering unlimited data to customers. In March this year, he said unlimited data "doesn't work in an LTE environment." In 2011, Shammo also helped the carrier move from unlimited plans. - Link

So what do you think, boys and girls? Is it about time? Or is it a little too late???

[Railgun]

It's about time. I can't wait to see all the tests people do to make sure there are no hidden limits

[Wolther]

There's always a catch. I expect there to be one

[Suika]

2 minutes ago, Wolther said:

There's always a catch. I expect there to be one

I mean, yea, I mentioned it. After 22GB, your data will be "prioritized below other customers" and video streaming is likely going to be limited to 480p/720p quality.

[shadowbyte]

eh, not so great imo

I switched from Verizon to T-mobile, and ended up with unlimited for the same price as 6gb on Verizon. T-mobile's coverage in my area is super solid, and just as fast as Wi-Fi.

[SCHISCHKA]

4G is a huge upgrade for most people on ADSL. Im on 4G and my downloads and upload speeds always impress ADSL users but my ping is the same for online gaming due to being at the bottom of the world. It will be interesting how they throttle accounts. I say stay away from torrenting and you shouldnt get as throttled as others

[Drak3]

If it isn't too expensive, I might just switch my personal line back over when it comes time to upgrade my S6.

[goodtofufriday]

It'll be good for my business. we do not need fast data, but even on a 100gb data plan we are going over by easily 50gb a month. We use the plan to just interconnect our buildings across the city. The overages are still cheaper than having a land line internet for every building. 

[Sephiroth]

Honestly, I'm fine with that as long as they're not throttling you even when the network isn't under serious load. If you've already used, say 100GB streaming movies etc... then during a time the network does require some members to be throttled yeah, go with them first over the guy who rarely uses his data. Just don't be doing it as soon as someone hits 22GB or what appears to be a 500MB daily soft-limit, if circumstances don't require 

[shermantanker]

I'm on Verizon and pay for a 6 gig plan, and will stay with it because I don't want mobile video throttled.

[vanished]

Quote

With Verizon Unlimited, you also get HD video streaming, Mobile Hotspot, calling and texting to Mexico and Canada and up to 500 MB/day of 4G LTE roaming in Mexico and Canada - included.

lol wut?  Mobile hotspot and the ability to do HD video playback are functions of the phone... nothing to do with the carrier.

 

I think Comcast should advertise support for i7 processors and 4K graphics with their internet plans next.

 

[Suika]

9 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

lol wut?  Mobile hotspot and the ability to do HD video playback are functions of the phone... nothing to do with the carrier.

Perhaps it's a US thing, but carriers love restricting those features.

[Guest Kloaked]

30 minutes ago, Suika said:

I mean, yea, I mentioned it. After 22GB, your data will be "prioritized below other customers" and video streaming is likely going to be limited to 480p/720p quality.

Even though it's pretty shitty, I think it's a start.

[Drak3]

15 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Mobile hotspot and the ability to do HD video playback are functions of the phone... nothing to do with the carrier.

Carriers in the US are allowed to block mobile hotspot functionality, provided they offer an option around that block, such as paying for the feature.

As for HD video playback, that's in regard that their LTE network SHOULD (but most of the time, probably won't, too many active users drive down speed. Hence why Verizon can see slower speeds in large cities when T-Mobile and Sprint, both of worse reliability in most places) have enough throughput to do HD when the content providers support it.

 

7 minutes ago, Suika said:

Perhaps it's a US thing, but carriers love restricting those features.

It's not exclusive to the US per se, but it's significantly easier to do that here.

[deleted_member_030719]

Here I am getting screwed at $7.5 CAD per 100MBs of data...

[vanished]

14 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Carriers in the US are allowed to block mobile hotspot functionality, provided they offer an option around that block, such as paying for the feature.

 

27 minutes ago, Suika said:

Perhaps it's a US thing, but carriers love restricting those features.

 

wow.  Does no one realize how incredibly insane the whole mobile phone "system" is?  Carriers sell a select group of locked phones, install their own software on them, interfere with and slow your device's ability to get updates, and, apparently, even remove basic features of the device, only to sell them back to you.  If ISPs acted like that with PCs there would be riots in the street but everyone just seems to go along with this madness.... 

 

Then again, how do you stop it?

[Drak3]

8 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

 

 

wow.  Does no one realize how incredibly insane the whole mobile phone "system" is?  Carriers sell a select group of locked phones, install their own software on them, interfere with and slow your device's ability to get updates, and, apparently, even remove basic features of the device, only to sell them back to you.  If ISPs acted like that with PCs there would be riots in the street but everyone just seems to go along with this madness.... 

 

Then again, how do you stop it?

Unpopular opinion, I actually have 0 problem with them inhibiting mobile hotspots. It's THEIR service that I'm accessing. How they decide to run it, provided they do not inhibit my device itself (forced updates, locked firmware, and bloatware being big inhibitors in my eyes), is their business. The actual hotspot functionality on the phone is still there, it just cannot use data as per settings tied to the SIM.

Mobile carriers don't have large, virtual monopolies where they operate, and are constantly working to get a leg up on one another.

[vanished]

2 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Unpopular opinion, I actually have 0 problem with them inhibiting mobile hotspots. It's THEIR service that I'm accessing. How they decide to run it, provided they do not inhibit my device itself (forced updates, locked firmware, and bloatware being big inhibitors in my eyes), is their business. The actual hotspot functionality on the phone is still there, it just cannot use data as per settings tied to the SIM.

Mobile carriers don't have large, virtual monopolies where they operate, and are constantly working to get a leg up on one another.

I see their "jurisdiction" so to speak ending at the antenna in your phone.  They deliver data to your device.  what you decide to do with it beyond that is none of their business.  I see it as no different than an ISP telling you what networking hardware you're allowed to run in your house, and charging you more to have a router and plug in several PCs.

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I see their "jurisdiction" so to speak ending at the antenna in your phone.  They deliver data to your device.  what you decide to do with it beyond that is none of their business.  I see it as no different than an ISP telling you what networking hardware you're allowed to run in your house, and charging you more to have a router and plug in several PCs.

The problem with that is that how a mobile network operates vs a standard ISP operates. On mobile, there is a very limited amount of bandwidth to the service provider themselves to go around, too much usage and the average user's experience is far from acceptable, so these 'artificial' linitations are put into place to regulate usage.

How one uses their data on a mobile network actually affects other users at the service provider's level (hardwired ISPs have enough theouput to them that it's far from an issue, and the burden is on the content providers). One of their responsibilities (provided they like having customers) is ensuring a decent experience for as many customers as possible.

[vanished]

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

The problem with that is that how a mobile network operates vs a standard ISP operates. On mobile, there is a very limited amount of bandwidth to the service provider themselves to go around, too much usage and the average user's experience is far from acceptable, so these 'artificial' linitations are put into place to regulate usage.

How one uses their data on a mobile network actually affects other users at the service provider's level (hardwired ISPs have enough theouput to them that it's far from an issue, and the burden is on the content providers). One of their responsibilities (provided they like having customers) is ensuring a decent experience for as many customers as possible.

I'm sure there's a better way to load balance the network, be it copper or wireless, than disabling hotspots.  It just makes no sense.  I can think of plenty of situations where you could use a hotspot very lightly, or totally suck the network dry with only your phone.  Hotspots aren't the problem, it's how they're load balancing (or failing to).

 

At least that's my take on it.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I'm sure there's a better way to load balance the network, be it copper or wireless, than disabling hotspots.  It just makes no sense.  I can think of plenty of situations where you could use a hotspot very lightly, or totally suck the network dry with only your phone.  Hotspots aren't the problem, it's how they're load balancing (or failing to).

 

At least that's my take on it.

The problem is that while you or I are very smart with our data, the average consumer isn't. These practices act as a good deterrent to keep massive load issues from arising. It's actually fairly easy for a Windows or Linux PC to suck up data with background processes, compared to a Windows or Android phone.

Not many people are aware of that, and not many would care/remember either.

[vanished]

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

The problem is that while you or I are very smart with our data, the average consumer isn't. These practices act as a good deterrent to keep massive load issues from arising. It's actually fairly easy for a Windows or Linux PC to suck up data with background processes, compared to a Windows or Android phone.

Not many people are aware of that, and not many would care/remember either.

imo, it still boils down to needing to properly load balance the network, regardless of what and how data is being consumed

[ionbasa]

16 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

 

 

wow.  Does no one realize how incredibly insane the whole mobile phone "system" is?  Carriers sell a select group of locked phones, install their own software on them, interfere with and slow your device's ability to get updates, and, apparently, even remove basic features of the device, only to sell them back to you.  If ISPs acted like that with PCs there would be riots in the street but everyone just seems to go along with this madness.... 

 

Then again, how do you stop it?

Just so you know, most Verizon branded phones are unlocked from the get go and are GSM compatible. Look at the iPhone as an example. Most T-Mobile phones are also unlocked given they're not under a device payment plan (loan), once a customer finishes paying off their phone, an unlock can be requested free of charge.

 

Then there's people like me. I buy my phones flat out, pre-unlocked, or just buy Verizon based phones (They offer both GSM and CDMA compatibility, ala iPhone). The non CDMA phones are locked into GSM only.

 

Secondly, most device payment plans aren't actually bad. They amount to a 0% interest loan/credit if paid on time. A majority of people would rather pay their costly devices off in smaller monthly chunks than shelling out $700+ dollars in one go. Hell, I even do it with Best Buy and Amazon (I have their credit cards with special financing). As long as you keep up your payments, it always ends up being 0% interest if done properly.

[vanished]

2 minutes ago, ionbasa said:

Just so you know, most Verizon branded phones are unlocked from the get go and are GSM compatible. Look at the iPhone as an example. Most T-Mobile phones are also unlocked given they're not under a device payment plan (loan), once a customer finishes paying off their phone, an unlock can be requested free of charge.

 

Then they're people like me. I buy my phones flat out, pre-unlocked, or just buy Verizon based phones (They offer both GSM and CDMA compatibility, ala iPhone). The non CDMA phones are locked into GSM only.

 

Secondly, most device payment plans aren't actually bad. They amount to a 0% interest loan/credit if paid on time. A majority of people would rather pay their costly devices off in smaller monthly chunks than shelling out $700+ dollars in one go. Hell, I even do it with Best Buy and Amazon (I have their credit cards with special financing). As long as you keep up your payments, it always ends up being 0% interest if done properly.

I wasn't even trying to bring up the whole contract side of things, but as you've explained, they're by far the least of our worries.

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

imo, it still boils down to needing to properly load balance the network, regardless of what and how data is being consumed

It's not quite as straight forward as you think it is. With a mobile network, UX needs to be maintained,and the amount of data provided per user can't quite support giving them all hotspots and deliver an acceptable UX consistently, unless they've got a condensed network and relatively few customers per tower, such as TMobile in large cities.