Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Google Businesses Cellphones

Google Launches Project Fi Mobile Phone Service 112

An anonymous reader writes: Google unveiled today a new cell phone service called Project Fi. It offers the same basic functionality as traditional wireless carriers, such as voice, text and Internet access, but at a lower price than most common plans. From the article: "Google hopes to stand out by changing the way it charges customers. Typically, smartphone owners pay wireless carriers like AT&T and Verizon a bulk rate for a certain amount of data. Google says it will let customers pay for only what data they use on their phones, from doing things like making calls, listening to music and using apps, potentially saving them significant amounts of money. For now, the program is invite-only and will only be available on Google's Nexus 6 smartphone."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Launches Project Fi Mobile Phone Service

Comments Filter:
  • Too expensive. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by BenJeremy ( 181303 ) on Wednesday April 22, 2015 @02:19PM (#49530499)

    $50 a month to match my son's BoostMobile plan, except he still gets data (at 2G speeds) after he exceeds his limit, and pays $40/month.

    Come on, Google, you used to be cool.

    • I'm averaging less than $50 month for two lines at Ting. [ting.com]
      • Man, when the first post fails basic math, the rest of the thread is pretty useless. Don't believe everything you read on the internet kids!
        • $20 (basic phone service)+$30 (3GB data) = $50

          At least, the last time I checked, 20+30=50.

          Maybe you should stick to homeschooling.

          • All the homeschoolers I knew were far better at math than public school kids. Your "joke" is asinine.

            • Some I know have issues calculating the age of the earth, usually off by a few orders of magnitude.

          • by ZipK ( 1051658 )

            Maybe you should stick to homeschooling.

            If he sticks to homeschooling, he can't get vaccinated.

          • by Maxwell ( 13985 )
            Maybe you should learn how to use a computer before posting? You see that little downward arrow thingy on the google site? That's called a Drop Down List. When you click the arrow, a list of options is presented. There is also a default option. In googles case the Default option is "3G, $30". But if you click that little arrow, you can pick other options! Amazing! And if you read the terms of the deal you will find they charge $1/100M of data. Being able to read is a huge win in modern society, I suggest
            • ...and what part of my comparing it to what my son's typical usage are you unable to process? My post infers that he regularly uses 3GB of data monthly on BoostMobile (see the part about him exceeding his data cap), which costs him $40/month and uses the same network as Google's Fi service. As a bonus, he doesn't have to use a specific, single model of phone.

              Under Google's Fi service, basic service $20+ 3GB data $30 = $50

              I guess math and reading comprehension is difficult for you?

      • 3 Lines moderate to heavy usage under 70 bucks.

      • Then you probably use very little data, otherwise your monthly bill would be higher. You could probably get two lines for about $50 with Fi too. ($40 for voice and text, $10 for 500MB on each phone). Plus you would get free roaming, and would no longer have to count your talk time.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      And Republic Wireless has a $40/mo plan with unlimited talk and text and "unlimited" data (throttled after 5GB). To get a 5GB/mo deal from Google it's $70/mo.

      I mean, I'm glad Google is entering the space to force competition onto the wireless oligarchy but it's still too expensive.

      I have two Moto E phones on Republic with the $10/mo plan where I get only wi-fi data. That works great for me because I have wireless at home that's uncapped as far as how much I can use and unthrottled with bandwidth capped 35Mb

      • The one thing I miss [on a Republic Wireless talk and text only plan] is not having [data] in my car because I can't just check slashdot or whatever while driving but really, that's a good thing.

        In other words, the Republic Wireless plan that you describe is more suited for people who drive than for people who use public transit. Someone who takes the bus to and from work goes by open Wi-Fi hotspots so fast that the device doesn't even have a chance to associate, let alone present and allow the user to submit the "I agree to the terms" page.

      • by rch7 ( 4086979 )
        This fails basic logic again. 5 GB is not unlimited. It is 5 GB limit. With flexible plan like this Google Fi (it is not unique) you use 1 GB one month and pay $30, 2 GB next month and pay $40. It is unlikely you use all 5 GB every month. And if you do, you better start looking for something else, as your service provide may just drop you service when you need it most for "abuse".
        • Re:Too expensive. (Score:4, Informative)

          by squiggleslash ( 241428 ) on Wednesday April 22, 2015 @09:00PM (#49533521) Homepage Journal

          5GB is not unlimited, but 5GB High speed + unlimited lower speed is unlimited. The GP is referring to a plan of the latter type.

          Being speed throttled sucks, but it's still good enough access for most web-on-phone tasks.

          • by rch7 ( 4086979 )
            And this is very weird logic. You are punished for consuming more product by hardly usable speed or complete disconnect threat. Any reasonable seller elsewhere would be happy and try to sell you more product at reduced price. All this because of silly "unlimited" advertising claim, which contradicts basic logic. There is no "unlimited" neither in cellular plans nor in web hosting. It makes much more sense to have pay per unit plan when you don't need to gamble how much you will use in the future (and loose
    • by Anonymous Coward

      Same sentiments, $10 per gig is an order or magnitude higher than it should cost. Can't really fault Google though, that is probably what they are being charged by att, sprint, or whoever else they are leasing tower space from.

      • My daughter uses a $30 AT&T Go Phone plan. They charge $5 per 100 MB. That is almost criminal if you ask me. At > $50 /GB, there is plenty of room for plans like this in the pay-as-you-go market. Once I realized what she (or ...mostly I) am getting for the money there is no way I will ever do business with that company again. When her service runs out, time for a new carrier.
      • Curiously, I use MetroPCS, another MVNO that uses T-Mobile towers. MetroPCS only charges $5 for the first 2.5GB and $5/GB after that for tethered data. Since they're using the same towers as Google, you'd think the big G could at least be competitive with existing MVNOs using the same equipment. Also, it is interesting to note that at the 35 mbps LTE speed I get, I can suck down 1 GB in under 4 minutes. At $10 per four minutes of data, Google is asking more than some phone sex operators.
        • FWIW MetroPCS isn't an MVNO that uses T-Mobile, it is T-Mobile. T-Mo acquired them a year or two ago. It's just a brand now.

    • The plan is $20 month, plus $10 per gig of data. Not sure where or how you got $50 out of that. If you regularly used more than 3G/month three are better 'bulk' plans available. But if you have busy and low months and need to scale to 3G occasionally this works out. To quote: "Our plan starts with the Fi Basics for $20 per month. This includes: Unlimited domestic talk and text Unlimited international texts Low-cost international calls Wi-Fi tethering Coverage in 120+ countries Then it's $10 per GB for
      • Thats fine if you don't use very much data but $45 for unlimited is a much better deal. I use about 2.5 -3.5 GB month depending on how much I'm driving and if I'm using it for GPS a lot. My wife and son on the other hand 5-8 GB month facebook, games, skype it adds up fairly quickly.

    • You can change his plan too. Boost offers 2GB/mo 4G LTE for $30/mo, which simply degrades to 3G when he hits 2GB.

      I don't bother with the higher plans. I play Ingress a lot, use it constantly for mail, and I do a lot of web stuff when not home. Like searching for reviews and price comparisons when I'm out shopping. I also occasionally tether my laptop if I need to do something and don't have wifi available. At home and when I'm in an office, I get on wifi. It's not a bandwidth saving measure though,

      • Ah, I see they do offer comparable pricing to Boost. 1GB with service is $30. 2GB is $40, but if I use 1.5GB they credit the difference. Sounds like it's worth trying.

    • And what's your average monthly data usage? Does it includes roaming in 120 countries?
    • by RevWaldo ( 1186281 ) on Wednesday April 22, 2015 @04:01PM (#49531421)
      So the fee makes you a fi foe?

      .
    • by rch7 ( 4086979 )
      That $10/GB from Google is flexible. You pay what you actually use, and can use more or less at the same $10/GB rate. With plans from most other providers you pay for random limit even if you don't use it, and once you go over, you are doomed. And did you noticed that $10/GB is world-wide price?
    • If this service works as they say it does, it doesnt have the SHITTY network problems that boost mobile and virgin mobile have. I have been a customer of virgin mobile for almost 3 years, ans im always on the look out for something like this, simple, CHEAP(for me it will only for 30 dollars for most months), and also having great service and connectivity. So yea, google is still cool, you just have to widen your perspective! PS: you know how people pay more for better internet connection? While your son ha
    • Yeah, but with Google's plan, every packet of data goes through network equipment they own, and are likely inspecting and indexing to their heart's content!

  • by swb ( 14022 ) on Wednesday April 22, 2015 @02:27PM (#49530577)

    Google should just buy Sprint and T-Mobile, merge their networks to optimize their coverage footprints and backhaul and then sell this plan to anyone and any device.

    • TMobile is GSM and Sprint isn't?
      • If Google were to buy both Sprint and T-Mobile, then it wouldn't matter which phone the customer brings. In areas that lack LTE coverage, CDMA2000 phones would work on Sprint, and GSM/UMTS phones would work on T-Mobile.

      • Sprint is phasing in LTE, the 4G iteration of GSM. T-Mobile is operating all three GSM versions at the moment, including LTE.

        .
        Just drawing random lines while I wait for this post to go through
        _
        1. Slow Down Cowboy! Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment. It's been 2 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form. Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator. Reply to: Re:Google should just buy Sprint and T-Mo

          .
    • by neminem ( 561346 )

      Just use Ting.

      Ting was also a Sprint-only MVNO, until a few months ago, when they started supporting T-Mobile as well. They do allow you to do use any device that is capable of connecting to either of those providers, and their plan is, while not quite the same as Google's, the most similar of any existing provider.

    • by schnell ( 163007 )

      Google should just buy Sprint and T-Mobile, merge their networks to optimize their coverage footprints and backhaul and then sell this plan to anyone and any device.

      1. 1.) There's not a lot of "optimizing" to be done since they overlap in most areas already.
      2. 2.) Sprint is a mixture of CDMA and LTE. T-Mobile is a mixture of GSM (HSPA) and a smattering of LTE. That's plenty of different technologies to support which means you might not even be able to ditch your overlapping tower leases, which is the main cost savings when consolidating carriers.
      3. 3.) Why do you think Sprint and T-Mobile are significantly cheaper than AT&T and Verizon? Because they spend much less on th
      • by swb ( 14022 )

        1.) There's not a lot of "optimizing" to be done since they overlap in most areas already.
        2.) Sprint is a mixture of CDMA and LTE. T-Mobile is a mixture of GSM (HSPA) and a smattering of LTE. That's plenty of different technologies to support which means you might not even be able to ditch your overlapping tower leases, which is the main cost savings when consolidating carriers.
        3.) Why do you think Sprint and T-Mobile are significantly cheaper than AT&T and Verizon? Because they spend much less on their networks, especially once you get outside the big cities. If Google were to actually improve their networks to the point of being competitive with the "big two," they couldn't afford to offer plans at these prices.

        I think of optimizing as:

        * Sunset CDMA support. Gone in 18 months. Shift everything to GSM/LTE. T-Mobile's network is there already, Sprint halfway. Too bad so sad for low end consumers hanging onto CDMA devices.
        * In areas with maximal overlap, eliminating both CDMA and duplicated services may allow for better coverage in areas where both carriers have weaker coverage. If you can eliminate 40% of your coverage because its duplicated you should be able to expand your coverage by 20% at about the same cost basis. I don't think they would have to immediately become ATT/VZW sized in coverage, even small improvements would help.

        4.) The last two times somebody tried to buy T-Mobile, (AT&T in 2011 and Sprint just last year - remember that?) the FCC smacked them down on anti-trust concerns over having only three nationwide carriers. Not likely to change, especially given that Google has its own anti-trust issues from time to time...

        Depends on how Google did it. I think if they did it with transparency as a wholly-owned but independent subsidiary that was device and service agnostic (ie, not favoring Android or Google products) and did it with the same kind of "new pricing model" fanfare they might gain some traction. I think people are almost as sick of cell phone gouging as they are of cable gouging and there may be some approval for a combination that was poised to break the model. Just combining Sprint and T-Mobile as yet another cell phone company operating the same way as ever isn't appealing. Creating a real competitor doing this differently is.

    • Sprint and T-mo have been talking about a merger for years, and still haven't actually announced anything, nor gained government approval. What makes you think that Google could get that done, if the two companies themselves want to, and can't get it done?

      Besides, this is yet one more thing that Google is going way past their area of experience with. Don't be surprised when they unceremoniously shut this off in 3 years due to a "lack of interest" and screwing anyone that actually did sign up at the same t

  • by slinches ( 1540051 ) on Wednesday April 22, 2015 @02:31PM (#49530621)

    This plan is reasonable for calling and texts, but the data prices are way too high.

    If I were to switch to this plan I'd be paying 4x as much per month than I am currently (@30GB/mo T-mobile unlimited everything = $80, Google fi = $320). The wifi hotspot thing wouldn't help much either since I don't spend much time in range of any publicly accessible networks.

    • I didn't specifically see any language stating that wifi usage won't be counted towards total usage.
    • If I were to switch to this plan I'd be paying 4x as much per month than I am currently (@30GB/mo T-mobile unlimited everything = $80, Google fi = $320). The wifi hotspot thing wouldn't help much either since I don't spend much time in range of any publicly accessible networks.

      "potentially saving them significant amounts of money" ie for cell users that consume very little data, Googles offer would be quite attractive. Obviously the savings dry up as your data usage increases.

      • Yes, but why would Google target users who don't use much data? Don't they want you to be constantly connected and not worry about how much data you're using? At least that was the message for Google fiber.

    • It's pricey for heavy users. But for light users it's a good deal. Many people average about 300 MB/month. That's enough for emails, facebook, maps, etc. The problem with regular 500-2000 MB plans is that:
      1. You overpay each month
      2. If once a year you need more data, the overcharges are way too expensive.
      3. It most probably do not include roaming to other countries, which again, is expensive.
    • by Ichijo ( 607641 ) on Wednesday April 22, 2015 @03:31PM (#49531125) Journal

      The $10/GB should be free (or cheap) during times of light data traffic on the cellular network, similar to "unlimited nights and weekends" voice plans.

    • by schlachter ( 862210 ) on Wednesday April 22, 2015 @04:34PM (#49531695)

      plenty of people use less than 1GB/month by habit or by intention. for them, $30/month is pretty awesome.

    • In your case you are right, but that doesn't mean $10/gb is pricey for everyone. In my case it is perfect, i'd pay 40(what i'm paying now for Virgin Mobile) and i'd get most of the 20 dollars for data plan back because I am in wifi range a quite often, not to mention that it probably will have way better connectivity than Virgin mobile. So yeah, too much in your case, but perfect for mine.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    I pay ~$45 for unlimited everything (throttled after 3GB) using Net10.

    Using Google Fi I would pay roughly the same amount ($50).

    What is the benefit? The "roll-over" data?

    Not trolling, I'm legitimately curious.

    • The problem with the rollover is that my son listens to Pandora... and often hits his cap every month. He'd never have rollover, and instead of throttling, he'd just get cut off.

      Also, he'd have no choice in the devices he used.

      • The problem with the rollover is that my son listens to Pandora... and often hits his cap every month.

        For the price of 24 GB of cellular data, you could just buy 200 singles on Google Play Music, transcode them to 128 kbps Vorbis, and load them onto the device over MTP or Wi-Fi. They'll occupy about 1 GB of the phone's storage.

        • I have a teen age son he not only listens to pandora he also is on youtube, skype, snapchat, and facebook all the time data can add up fairly quickly. Him and my wife both were watching netflix when on a short 30 minute road trip the other day. It wouldn't be a problem for me since I don't usually use any of network heavy services unless I'm on wifi and my data usage is usually under 3GB.

        • I told him to use the library of music he already has, which is quite extensive (he's 22 and out of the house), but being young and lazy about stuff like this, things probably won't change.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      > What is the benefit? The "roll-over" data?

      You use lots of data. You are not the target market.

      Last year I had a data plan. I used about 20MB of cellular data per month, because I am almost always near wifi. I stopped paying for data. Paying an extra $30 per month for a Gigabyte of data (98% of which I do not use) was stupid. This plan is for me.

  • tethering (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bigmo ( 181402 ) on Wednesday April 22, 2015 @02:38PM (#49530673)

    One plus is the ability to tether. I have to pay an extra $50 a month with Verizon for a jet pack. This would cut that out entirely.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • I switched from verizon to sprint, got 20 gig plan, lease two IPhone6+ and got a free Tablet, my bill is 200 a month, 75$ of that is phone lease, got the upgrade anytime thing.. So for 20 gig of data, on 3 devices including all calling and text is 125$ including taxes. I live where there is no cable and wireless internet is nuts due to installation costs. You can tether off any of the devices, I use the tablet as my access point and get good data rates and ping. I was really hoping that their data rate woul

    • by adolf ( 21054 )

      Why can't you tether on Verizon? I do it all the time, and have since the OG Droid days. No big deal.

      • by alcmena ( 312085 )
        If you have an unlimited plan, as I do, tethering isn't "allowed" on Verizon. Not to say it isn't possible... you just have to be more familiar with your device's workings than most people tend to be.
    • by chooks ( 71012 )

      I always thought extra charges for tethering were BS. When I got my first Google Nexus S phone on sprint, it was free, but they quickly shut down that capability.

      I am on Ting (uses Sprint's network) now. Two phones (me and the wife) with as much phone/text/data as we need comes to around $70 TOTAL. I tether my tablet to my phone on the commute and all is well. My phone bill is one that I actually smile when I get after being used to getting ***raped by other carriers.

      Oh yeah - and the customer service

  • I have co-workers with both sprint and tmobile. They get no service here, yet google's coverage map shows the best possible coverage....WTF?

    • Did Google announce which two networks they work on? I just assumed it was VZ and AT&T from the pricing for data.

      • Who are Project Fi's cellular network partners?
        Project Fi has partnered with Sprint and T-Mobile, two of the leading carriers in the US, to launch our service. You can view our US coverage at fi.google.com/coverage.

  • without the NEXT charges my bill is around $220 for 6 lines on the account. google would be $120 plus the data plus being limited to one choice of phone

  • by sirwired ( 27582 ) on Wednesday April 22, 2015 @02:50PM (#49530775)

    This deal is good for some people, not good for others. If you think it'll work for you, sign up, if you don't, then don't. It seems more than a bit of a stretch to proclaim that the plan is a colossal failure because it does not meet your particular needs.

    For somebody regularly near Wi-Fi (and therefore a low user of data), it's a pretty good plan, with only $20/mo for the unlimited T&T, and data that is reasonably priced if you don't use that much of it.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      The complaining is a result of higher expectations. Even if the plan is better for some than existing offers by competitors, people expected Google to undercut the competition by a wide margin or provide a much better service, like they did with their fiber to the home product. $10/GB is hilariously expensive compared to mobile plans in other countries. $20 for unlimited (domestic) calls and SMS is nothing to brag about to your foreign contacts either, especially because calling isn't the majority use of a

    • This deal is good for some people, not good for others. If you think it'll work for you, sign up, if you don't, then don't. It seems more than a bit of a stretch to proclaim that the plan is a colossal failure because it does not meet your particular needs.

      Don't know if you missed the part where it requires a Nexus 6. Due to Sprint being one of the network providers, it's also very likely to continue to be limited to "approved handsets" only, going forward. So, even if you think this is a great deal and the plans are up your alley, you still also have to want/already own a Nexus 6.

      Personally, for my usage, Cricket's $35/mo plan is still a better deal. Plus, it runs on AT&T's network and I can use any unlocked GSM phone I want.

  • it is not advertised, but you can still get in Sprint Framily plan if you know your way. It costs $25 for 1GB or $45 for unlimited data with no contract. This plan allows roaming, so while the coverage is not on par with Verizon, it is still much better than with any prepaid carriers.
    • Straighttalk unlimited plan is $45/m and uses Sprint, Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile networks depending on phone of course you can bring your own compatible unlocked phone or buy one they provide including iPhone.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    If you want to boast about being a new cheap alternative, at least do some shopping of what your competitors are offering.

    I pay about 13 bucks for my wifes cell on republic wireless, she uses the wifi portion mostly and if she needs 3g she can toggle it on and get charged for when she uses it.

    I'll just leave this here. https://republicwireless.com/plans/

  • Republic Wireless effectively does the same thing as this, for less money, with less expensive phones, MotoX|G|E. As of May 18th, RW is starting a test of allowing users to customize his or her plan and refund unused data. $25/mo with 5GB of data. I'd rather support them instead of Google, too.
    • Republic Wireless effectively does the same thing as this, for less money, with less expensive phones, MotoX|G|E. As of May 18th, RW is starting a test of allowing users to customize his or her plan and refund unused data. $25/mo with 5GB of data. I'd rather support them instead of Google, too.

      I agree that Republic is a better deal than Google in some cases. However, you are required to buy one of just a few Republic Wireless phones in order to use their service. But you are correct that Republic Wirelesses broke a lot of ground with their Wifi to Cellular network bridge software.

  • How does this not fly in the face of net-neutrality? This is a per-usage fee. Sure, there's no fee back to the content provider, and I'm aware that mobile carriers have some exemptions to traditional wire-based ISP's, but this seems like an move from Google. Moreover, this sounds like any old pay-per-data plan mobile providers have floated/attempted in the past. What is new here?
    • What possible change would this be to Net Neutrality? Are they claiming that they will charge more for traffic originating off network than their own traffic?

    • Well, besides the obvious new stuff allowing you to access multiple cell providers with no input from you, the main benefit I see here is the ability to recoup unused data. If you buy 2GB but only use 1.5GB, you get a refund of 5 bucks.

      I don't know how much this would have save me through my years with Verizon, but it would have been significant since about 80 per cent of the time I don't use all the data on my plan and of that amount I would estimate it to average close to a gig a month.

      If the cell provide

  • by allquixotic ( 1659805 ) on Wednesday April 22, 2015 @03:42PM (#49531227)

    Can't tell you how many times my coworkers, who have limited data but know I have unlimited data, have asked me while we're out and about if I could google something, or ask me to turn on my wifi hotspot.

    There is a definite and obvious use case for unlimited or very cheap data when "anywhere" (where my specific definition of "anywhere" means, typically, on the road, or at any number of random retail establishments or private office complexes in the Baltimore metro area / suburban sprawl). Landline-backed WiFi is rarely available, and where it is, it's not free, or too slow to be useful.

    The telcos can give us excuses all day about why we can't have unlimited or very cheap data, but eventually they're going to have to figure it out. There is a ridiculous amount of pent-up demand for cheap cellular data, or any alternative that gives you instant broadband-speed data at your fingertips almost anywhere. WiFi, WiMax, and all the other alternatives that have tried to be it, have utterly failed to come even close because of a lack of coverage. The only alternative we have today is grandfathered unlimited on Verizon & AT&T if you need tethering, or Sprint/T-Mo if you don't need tethering.

    No, $10/GB is not insanely cheap. $0.10 per GB is closer to the order of magnitude I'm willing to pay, with $0.01 as the ideal. I think the telcos haven't unlocked pricing on this level for the masses because they're too busy swimming in their $10 bills, not because there is an engineering brick wall that would prevent them from doing this.

    I have nothing against paying by the gigabyte. I'm not at all married to the idea of unlimited. I just refuse to accept paying such an outlandish fee for a gigabyte of data, when 1 GB is almost nothing with today's content-rich web apps (auto-playing 1080p videos, images, huge .js applications, etc.) In fact, some websites can easily make you spend $1 or more in a couple seconds by just visiting a company's homepage, and while the page is rendering and you're fumbling around trying to tap the close button, you've downloaded more than 100 MB of video, and spent upwards of a dollar. Not cool, but it happens.

    I think, to determine the price per gigabyte, we should back into it by determining a reasonable price for one second of saturated average throughput (SAT), which should be set to the expected downstream you'd get if you're downloading at "saturation speed" (as fast as the LTE modem can go with the current bandwidth available) for one second.

    For Verizon LTE, SAT would currently be something like 20 Mbps. So that means you would be downloading 20 Megabits in one second. To download one gigabyte, you would have to download continuously at 20 Mbps for 400 seconds. If we set our one-second SAT target price at $0.0001, this means you could currently charge $0.04 per gigabyte, which I think is a great price.

    However, the price per gigabyte should go down the higher the bandwidth. The goal is to prevent any one second of SAT from costing too much. So if they doubled the LTE bandwidth to 40 Mbps SAT, to maintain our target one-second price of $0.0001, we'd have to charge $0.02 per gigabyte. By measuring the user's bill according to what we consider to be a reasonable price for 1 second of SAT, the carriers will be adjusting the price per gigabyte to be lower and lower the more bandwidth is available. This is something consumers want (and need) to see.

    Compare this to the current model, where 1 GB of data has been the same since 3G days. Even though we have many times more bandwidth and capacity on the mobile networks than we used to in 2003, we're still billing customers $10 per GB. That, I think, is completely unreasonable. The only reason this has happened is that the carriers are trying to get their customers into the hundred-millions, so they're dividing their limited resources by a great deal more handsets than they had on the network in 2003. I don't agree with this model one bit. It means that us early adopters are now effectivel

    • by Maxwell ( 13985 )

      Can't tell you how many times my coworkers, who have limited data but know I have unlimited data, have asked me while we're out and about if I could google something, or ask me to turn on my wifi hotspot.

      Where do you live, 1990?

      • No, I live in a place where most people have Verizon or AT&T with limited data, because the alternatives have horrid coverage. They pay huge monthly bills for ant-fart-sized data plans, like 5 or 10 GB per month for an entire family.

        They have unlimited data or extremely high caps on their home Internet connection, sure, but I haven't seen any of them unraveling 25 miles of structured cabling with them as they drive from their house to work.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Maybe I am interpreting the article incorrectly, but from what I understand, the smart phone will use the 4G network of Sprint and T-Mobile. What will the phone do when 4G service is not available? I assume that the phone will fall back to 3G GSM and/or EVDO. So, will the smartphones have bot GSM or EVDO, or even CDMA 1xRTT capability? Both? Neither?

    Some places that I visit do not have 4G service. I actually bought an old $50 3G phone instead of a Nexus 6.

  • I don't want a new phone, so the plan is a non-starter right there.

    But the pricing seems more of a shot across the bow of ATT&T and Verizon. TMobile, and other MVNOs can be cheaper at some levels, but this has the weight of Google behind it. For better and for worse Google is flexing it's muscles in the ISP arena. Google Fiber really is causing changes with AT&T and Comcast. I see this as that - you'll never get Google Fiber/Google FI in every home every phone, but it makes people realize there

    • Google sees the future, and its not in what their core business is. The future in larger metro areas is community wifi replacing cellular, which is eventual anyways now that the Supreme Court has made the vertically integrated monoliths utilities. LTE is a transitional technology, and by the time it's deployed and the GSM/CDMA wars end, it will all be a moot point. Qualcomm is going down, now that Samsung has abandoned them, so wireless will finally settle on a winner there. I would really rather see th
  • I have one of those free Obama phones. It's a dumb phone, yes, and I get free minutes every month. Currently because of the plan I choose, I have over 5000 mins stacked up.

    I'm guessing the google plan isn't for me, since I need a Nexus 6 and I have a crappy dumb fucking phone that sounds like shit.

    I need a better phone.

    Anyways, I like what google is doing here. If I didn't have a free phone and had a Nexus 6, I'd love to get on it. But alas, I don't.

  • i can get better data plains from the carriers its based off. like metro pcs 60$ no data cap. i know why its hi sprint does charge stupid prices for there data plains and its even worse when its a 3rd party buying it.
  • by sabbede ( 2678435 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @06:23AM (#49535235)
    that it's all just data. It's absurd the way carriers have been pretending voice and data are somehow different.

Kill Ugly Processor Architectures - Karl Lehenbauer

Working...