T-Mobile Starts Going After Heavy Users of Tethered Data 346
VentureBeat reports that T-Mobile CEO John Legere has announced that T-Mobile will cut off (at least from "unlimited" data plans) customers who gloss over the fine print of their data-use agreement by tethering their unlimited-data phones and grab too much of the network's resources. In a series of tweets on Sunday, Legere says the company will be "eliminating anyone who abuses our network," and complains that some "network abusers" are using 2TB of data monthly. The article says, "This is the first official word from the carrier that seems to confirm a memo that was leaked earlier this month. At that time, it was said action would be taken starting August 17 and would go after those who used their unlimited LTE data for Torrents and peer-to-peer networking."
You keep using that word. I don't think it means (Score:5, Funny)
... what you think it means.
Re:You keep using that word. I don't think it mean (Score:5, Informative)
TFA abbreviates the quote from T-Mobile CEO John Legere. Here it is in full:
"Marketing thought we could call it 'unlimited', because that would sell. But then engineering pointed out that our network couldn't support that kind of load. So we had legal work out deals with the handset manufacturers so that the phone would limit data usage anyway. That way, we could call it 'unlimited', but in reality, it would be limited; Clever eh? But our customers noticed, and are downloading apps that hide their tether usage, rooting their phones, writing code to mask their activity, etc. It's all their fault. I mean, obviously we have the right to lie to our customers, and put whatever software we want on their phones. But now they are changing that software! They are thieves I tell you. THIEVES!"
Re:You keep using that word. I don't think it mean (Score:5, Interesting)
Essentially it's OK to lie if you offer a product but not if you buy it.
It also highlights that operators try to tie specific devices to services instead of managing the "problem" on the server/provider side.
In all it's about being open, not locking in the customer. It's better to be straight with the customer about the fact that there is a ceiling on the usage.
Then there's another question of how the users really are able to run up a traffic volume in the terabyte class. That's actually pretty amazing, but if someone is streaming HD movies I can imagine that it may be chewing away the bytes pretty fast, but according to some a HD movie is about 2GB/hour. So that means 1000 hours for 2TB - and that means that you need to watch movies every hour in a month and still not reach 2TB.
Re:You keep using that word. I don't think it mean (Score:5, Informative)
From the open letter itself:
http://newsroom.t-mobile.com/i... [t-mobile.com]
Here’s what’s happening: when customers buy our unlimited 4G LTE plan for their smartphones we include a fixed amount of LTE to be used for tethering (using the “Smartphone Mobile HotSpot” feature), at no extra cost, for the occasions when broadband may not be convenient or available. If customers hit that high-speed tethering limit, those tethering speeds slow down. If a customer needs more LTE tethering, they can add-on more. Simple.
However, these violators are going out of their way with all kinds of workarounds to steal more LTE tethered data.
Since the customer was never sold unlimited tethered data, I don't see what the problem is? It's like going to an all you can eat restaurant and complaining that you can't take your leftovers home.
Re: (Score:3)
And how could they actually see the difference - forwarded data to PC versus used in the phone? As soon as the data traffic has reached the phone it's up to the phone owner to do whatever he/she want.
Re: (Score:2)
The phone makes the distinction because the phone sets up the tethered access point. Unless the user installs apps to get around this, which is what they did.
Not if the phone owner wants to abide by the contract they agreed to in their cellular plan. T-Mobile wants to have additional control on tethered data
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Supposedly, not that I'd know.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I have heard of people chewing up that much bandwidth.
Basically they were packrats, torrenting more than they could ever really hope to watch.
Or there was that dude that ran a home server with TB worth of movies (that he seems to have legally owned) that he made available to his family to stream.
There are few of them, but they do exist.
Re:You keep using that word. I don't think it mean (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
someone is using their phone to feed data to a PC I'm having a hard time seeing how they use 2TB a month.
Yes. Indeed. That word "tethering" in TFS? Now you know what it means.
People with capped cable have been using their phones to get uncapped data, and perhaps going overboard for as long as they can get away with it.
Re: (Score:2)
That phone would also need some extra cooling fins.
Re: (Score:2)
Some people are cancelling their home broadband and tethering the phone to their Wifi router.
Re: (Score:2)
1TB of legally owned movies isn't that much - if you have it in Blu-Ray rips that's well under 100 movies (each one is around 40GB average).
If they were more standard DVD-sized digital HD quality downloads, then we're only seeing 200 odd movies (4-6 GB each). A movie enthusiast having 200 movies isn't unusual.
Re: (Score:2)
Even that one month on vacation where I *did* tether since the kids wanted to get online with their new Christmas present laptops at our no-local-internet cabin and both wanted to do full Windows updates. I think I hit 9 g
Re:You keep using that word. I don't think it mean (Score:4, Insightful)
Common sense says that nothing can be advertised as unlimited, because nothing on Earth is unlimited.
I'd have sympathy if they were using, say, 20GB a month, which is still a lot for a phone user...but 2 TB? Come on. I'd rather not have my connection slow because people are torrenting with their phone data.
Re:You keep using that word. I don't think it mean (Score:4, Insightful)
Common sense says that nothing can be advertised as unlimited, because nothing on Earth is unlimited.
No, it doesn't. "Unlimited" has a very well-defined meaning that is obvious for most people. "Unlimited" usage of a 6 Mbit connection means that you can use the full 6 Mbit 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. (This works out to about 2 TB/mo.)
Obviously, this is bad for the network, which is why offering an "unlimited" wireless plan is an incredibly stupid idea. But that is what T-mobile did. Blaming their customers for their own mistake and calling them "thieves" is pretty low.
Re:You keep using that word. I don't think it mean (Score:5, Informative)
Blaming their customers for their own mistake and calling them "thieves" is pretty low.
You realize that wasn't actually a real quote, right?
Read the press release! (Score:2, Informative)
You should read the official press release, on the t-mobile site he calls them THIEVES, he says they're STEALING.
Yeh really.
http://newsroom.t-mobile.com/issues-insights-blog/stopping-network-abusers.htm
" who have actually been stealing data from T-Mobile"...."We are going after every thief, "
2TB is a fucking lie, there's no way you'd get the theoretical bandwidth every second for a month. What he's doing is fucking lying like a scammer to cover his scam. Go on the offensive and attack your own customers in
Re: (Score:2)
http://newsroom.t-mobile.com/i... [t-mobile.com]
"I won't let a few thieves ruin things for anyone else."
And rightfully so. These people were NEVER SOLD unlimited tethering data. They WERE sold unlimited data for their phones, but not for tethering. They're bypassing tethering limits to get more data for themselves, which reduces the network for everyone else. It's not even victimless.
Here’s what’s happening: when customers buy our unlimited 4G LTE plan for their smartp
Re: (Score:3)
I would think most users would be entirely happy with "unlimited" simply meaning that any metering of their usage that may occur would not be used to either limit usage, nor to determine how much additional fees to charge them beyond whatever level of service they paid for.
Any limits that might exist on their usage would be strictly a consequence of whatever the technology is capable of based on how the network is actually being used, not only by them, but by all subscribers at the same moment that they
Re: (Score:2)
That is shitty customer service too though. The network should be available when you want to use it. Its like cable modems were in some neighbor hoods in the early days. If you tried to use one between 6-8pm in some places you might as well have been on dial up. Useless slow. That's been mostly fixed now days with smaller shared segments, faster signalling, and more bandwidth dedicated to data. That is less of an option on last mile and wireless.
I should be able to depend on being able to drive around
Re: (Score:2)
I have no problem with metered usage in general.... I also have no problem with any so-called unlimited plans either, but I'm suggesting that such labelling would only be justified when any such "unlimited" plans are designed such that any metering that may occur on them is strictly for reporting purposes, and does not actually affect what services or levels of service they are entitled to receive, or how much they pay for that service.
Their services may still be limited by things such as network bandwi
Like it's sold in data centers (Score:2)
What you're describing for "unlimited" is what would be termed in a data center "unmetered". If I buy a 100 Mbit unmetered pipe, I can do exactly as you say, max out the 100 Mbit pipe 24x7 as I please.
What customers really want, most likely, is something like a "burstable" connection with reasonable limits. Let's say I buy a 100 Mbit "burstable" connection with a 10 Mbit commit. That means I can use up to 100 Mbits at any moment, but if the average is over 10 Mbit I pay more. (It's actually not average, it'
Re: (Score:3)
"Unlimited" usage of a 6 Mbit connection means that you can use the full 6 Mbit 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Indeed. And 5GB of tethering means you can use 5GB of tethering, even if you have unlimited LTE on your phone. And that's what T-Mobile sells: Unlimited LTE for your phone, 5GB of LTE tethering for devices that connect to your phone. They don't even really cut you off if you go over that; I've used ~20GB during a move when I had no other options and they didn't slow me until ~18GB. The issue here is that people are bypassing the tethering limits they accepted when they signed up for the service. Those peopl
Re:You keep using that word. I don't think it mean (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree - especially if tethering is not allowed.
You can use a few GB if you watch a few movies. You can even use 20 or 100 GB if you tether. But 1TB and more is really not typical *private* internet use any more. If people want to serve websites or torrents, they should not do it on their phone.
Re: (Score:2)
You can even use 20 or 100 GB if you tether. But 1TB and more is really not typical *private* internet use any more.
HD movies tend to be in the 4-8 GB range if you don't cheat on quality. 200 GB is just 1 person watching HD movies. 2 TB is just 1 person torrenting everything he sees out of some strange (but seemingly common) compulsion.
If people want to serve websites or torrents, they should not do it on their phone.
A data plan's a data plan. It's not for you to say what the data is for.
Re: (Score:3)
Except the contract did say that "data is not data" because it differentiated between data destined to stay on the phone and data just passing through the phone to another device. Data may just be data for some purposes, but for the purpose of being in compliance with a signed T-Mobile contract, it appears that it is not.
Re: (Score:3)
Tethering and unlimited data are an either/or. Either you can have unlimited data but no tethering, or you can have tethering but with data caps.
Frankly, I think the latter makes a lot more sense. Tethering is a very useful tool built into every wifi-capable Android phone by default (the carriers disable it). If you have it, it eliminates the need to get a separate cellular data plan for your laptop, tablet, etc, and you're no longer limited to using t
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why is this "Informative"? "Insightful" I could understand, but given that it purports to be the "full quote" from Legere but blatantly isn't, in no way is it "Informative".
I did actually like this actual quote from TFA:
Well (Score:5, Funny)
if "inflammable" and "flammable" mean the same thing then why not "limited" and "unlimited"?
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe... "inlimited"?
Re: (Score:2)
So it's not unlimited, then... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm starting to get tired of this mentality from service providers that, just because someone is using their services in ways they didn't expect, they're somehow 'abusing' the service. If you advertise the service as unlimited, it should be unlimited. You shouldn't care that I'm using it to torrent or do whatever.
If you can't provide a truly unlimited service, don't advertise it
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If the contract explicitly forbids tethering and torrenting, then that's what subscribers are bound by.
Re: (Score:3)
you don't need to tether for torrenting.
never mind that selling you data is selling you data, not selling you data on the condition that you don't use the data.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
you don't need to tether for torrenting.
never mind that selling you data is selling you data, not selling you data on the condition that you don't use the data.
If they make no mentioning of tethering limitations in the agreement you sign up for, then you are correct. But when you have a bundle of conditions in an agreement you can't usually just pick and choose which parts of the agreement you want. Did you know that Google Photo's unlimited storage isn't really unlimited? There is a number of restrictions on what you can and can't do with the "unlimited" storage they are offering. You can't say that you want the unlimited part, but not the restrictions part of th
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, I hope you never buy a house. The difference between the marketing garbage from the realtors and the actual documents you sign will shatter your mind.
Re:So it's not unlimited, then... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't that why ads sometimes have E&OE - Errors And Omissions Excepted - basically a get-out?
OFFER, acceptance, "consideration" (Score:3)
> I'm not a lawyer, but there's a big difference between an ad and a contract.
> A contract requires consideration: both parties must exchange something real for the contract to be valid.
> But an ad has no consideration (beyond wasting your time, etc.)... it's a 1-way offer.
The classic test for a contract is that a contract requires:
An offer
An acceptance
Consideration (deliver, pay or exchange, etc)*
You said "an ad has no consideration (beyond wasting your time, etc.)... it's a 1-way offer". Right,
Re: So it's not unlimited, then... (Score:5, Informative)
The BBB is a rubber-stamp. All you need to do to display the BBB logo in your ads or claim you are "BBB Approved" is to send them a check.
A little while ago I filed a complaint about a car dealership I was having trouble with. They "investigated" and found the dealer not at fault. Which would be fine, except I looked up the history on those kind of complaints - and there wasn't even one case in which they found for the customer. It's kind of like the FBI investigating itself for shooting incidents - in all cases they found themselves not at fault.
Re: So it's not unlimited, then... (Score:4, Insightful)
I actually wasn't trolling, and even used my real Slashdot ID, while you're hiding anonymously.
Please, provide a substantive retort, not an ad hominem attack. My remark about marketing is sincere: it is normal and expected, by decent people in the real world I was born in, not to headline every possible deficiency, weakness or insecurity in a negotiation, e.g., job interview, craigslist sale, courting possible spouses, etc. People put their best face forward, but if asked a direct, unambiguous, detailed question, they don't respond in a way that is technically wrong. Yes, there is a dance, where people don't want to reveal too much, too soon. I believe most people know this or at least act as if they know this, and do it themselves. Somehow, in this instance, you think this practical reality of adult life shouldn't apply.
An absolutely unlimited internet connection is technically impossible, since the bandwidth of any network in the universe, however measured, is finite, and I believe you understand this. So you know that what is being marketed to you cannot *literally* be true, without some sort of qualification. By insisting that the pretty reasonable limitation imposed by T-mobile (de-prioritization beyond 21GB, the 97 percentile of users) is beyond the pale, it's hard to take your complaint seriously. If you say it should instead be the 98 percentile, well, we could discuss that. Instead you are, in effect, complaining about the laws of physics.
To be generous to you, perhaps you're instead worried about all the naive users who are buying the "unlimited" plan, but they don't understand that truly "unlimited" plans violate physical laws, and so they think that what they've got is *truly* unlimited. I'm sorry, that argument doesn't fly for me either, as I find it difficult to imagine any substantial number of users too uninformed or uneducated to understand the universal finiteness of network capacity and yet realistically able to configure their own tethering set-ups such that they're in the group that T-mobile is going after. Maybe it's possible if a friend set it up for them, but then that friend would understand the situation. So, practically, it is unlimited for the users that don't understand, and for those that do, well, they expect and can read the fine print.
Re: (Score:2)
An absolutely unlimited internet connection is technically impossible, since the bandwidth of any network in the universe, however measured, is finite, and I believe you understand this. So you know that what is being marketed to you cannot *literally* be true, without some sort of qualification.
Yes, and the natural assumption is that "unlimited" in this case means "as fast as it can be delivered", and if they aren't willing to do that for a given price, they shouldn't advertise it. Nobody is claiming that they should be able to get five inches worth of water through a three inch main. They just want that three inch main to deliver more than a one inch main could at the same pressure. And the user should not be expected to have to understand things like spectrum, or bandwidth congestion. Don't adve
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
OK, you're trolling me now.
You can't tolerate the disconnect between the marketing words and the actual agreement, and you understood this before you signed. It sounds like you don't like T-mobile's business practices, so you had a choice to make: sign the agreement and stomach their supposed sleaziness, or don't sign and don't enjoy the pretty substantial network, as "limited" as it truly may be, but, in making your principled stand against misleading marketing, you bask in the light of righteousness.
Re: (Score:3)
Nope. The contract doesn't forbid tethering. They charge extra (about $5 or $10 depending which unlimited plan you are starting from) for tethering. They are taking about the vague 'don't abuse / use to much your unlimited data' clauses in the contracts. Of course, these are the same people that will insist you must pay extra for rhapsody service if you want pandora radio to work, even though your contract & current plan already explicitly states music services are included and don't count towards any bandwidth/usage requirements.
We aren't paying for Rhapsody and get unlimited streaming music on T-Mobile. And I don't think you "pay" for Rhapsody anyway. It's just bundled in at their highest "unlimited" tier.
I also didn't read the fine print on said unlimited data, but intrinsically understood that there were going to be some fair limits. And incidentally, I think curtailing 3,000 out of millions of subscribers, and especially anyone using terabytes of data (that's more than my home broadband allows me to use) is included in what
Re: (Score:2)
You don't sign an agreement to eat in a buffet, but there's an understanding that if you start stuffing chicken wings in your pockets you might be thrown out.
Well put.
Re: (Score:2)
No it doesn't, that's just rationalization. Restaurants (successful, anyway) are *very* good at managing product waste. There's very little waste from a buffet.
Re: (Score:3)
No. Here in the US, both cable (Comcast, Timewarner, Suddenlink, etc) and DSL (AT&T) have data usage caps of around 250GB-450GB/mo. 2TB/mo isn't even a reasonable option (some plans you can buy more bandwidth at something like $50 for every 50GB, so 2TB/mo would be ~$2k/mo). On a mobile that's beyond silly to expect.
Re:So it's not unlimited, then... (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder whether it's actually even being used for tethering at all. Technically, there's no reason you can't just run a torrent app on a phone. My phone has 96GB of storage in it (counting SD card) and can access more than 5TB via LAN when I'm at home; if I *wanted* to use it for torrenting I could (and I'd be tempted to, because My T-Mobile connection is faster than my wired one).
With that said, wireless bandwidth is a limited resource that needs to be shared across a lot of people. There's a lot of really excellent use cases for it, and massive torrenting is one of them. I'm 100% in agreement with you that they shouldn't call it "unlimited" if they're going to put limits on it (though they'll probably try to weasel that by saying "it's only unlimited for un-tethered data; i.e. that which will be used by the phone directly!" Having good reason to not actually make something unlimited doesn't excuse calling it what it isn't.
Making the "Umlimited" plan only actually 100GB (before you get throttled like everybody else who goes over their limit; TMoUS never actually kills your data connection) would be pretty reasonable, I think. Throw in an increase to the official tethering cap for such accounts (currently 5GB) so that people who want to use the connection with their PC can do it without relying on hokey apps that try to enable tethering in ways the phone OS and network provider can't tell... well, I'm actually in favor of that! Yes, it'll limit me to approximately 7x as much data as I've ever used in a month, but it'll also keep that network more useful.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, that's exactly what their contract says; it's not weaseling. My contract says unlimited phone data, with explicit exclusions for tethering. The fact that they let me tether is amazing enough but I do watch my usage when I'm tethered because I'm not a fucking asshole.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Tough shit. If they sold something they couldn't deliver, then that's on them.
Re: (Score:3)
They can't even claim that the usage is unexpected. It's been an issue for every wireless data provider using every type of wireless technology ever since the first ISP offered wireless service. I spent 2 years fighting DirecPC back in the late 90s. Didn't get my unlimited service restored but at least the restrictions were explained to new customers.
The best thing that ever happened to my personal wireless data delivery was Verizon buying a huge chunk 700Mhz spectrum. The FCC slipped a little clause in
Re: (Score:2)
If I had any real criticism of T-Mo it's that, even in some densely-populated areas, their data and sometimes voice signal sucks eggs.
Re:So it's not unlimited, then... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm starting to get tired of this mentality from service providers that, just because someone is using their services in ways they didn't expect, they're somehow 'abusing' the service. If you advertise the service as unlimited, it should be unlimited. You shouldn't care that I'm using it to torrent or do whatever.
If you can't provide a truly unlimited service, don't advertise it
I believe that these "unlimited plans" were making the assumption that people aren't assholes. That's a terrible assumption to make.
Most user's aren't going to run torrents on their phones. In fact, I'm almost certain that type of use case wasn't even considered when they decided on the "unlimited plan" idea. They were probably only looking at the "average" use case with some deviation boundaries. But then along comes the spider that is Joe/Jane Torrent, who blows all usage estimation out of the water and screws over everyone else in an area by using his/her phone as an internet hub.
Companies should know better by now. Offer an "unlimited" anything and there will always be some part of the population who will use it in ways that will demonstrate just how stupid that idea was.
Re: (Score:3)
Anyway, 2TB seems pretty big to me. I'm following about a dozen shows at any given time, and, adding all my other internet activities, I hardly ever reach 100GB a month. I'd have to really think hard to come up with legitimate uses (besides home-run publ
Re: (Score:3)
Right 'we' and the service providers just need to admin reality: Last mile and wireless circuits have limited bandwidth. Its not practical to sell a limited resource at a single flat price. It violates the basic principles of economics.
I would like to see a single low fixed connection fee and a per megabyte charge, starting from megabyte 1. Just sell it like electricity or water. Every bit you use has a cost, so you have some incentive to minimize use. On the other hand you don't have to sit there go
Re: (Score:2)
Why would any traffic need to be exempt. A byte should be a byte unless it has a higher priority class set by YOU. Maybe something with a low latency QOS tag costs a little more. I don't see anything wrong with that either.
I am talking about edge networks here. Obviously the rules have to work a little different for transit networks. Those are not usually described as last mile or wireless though.
Re: (Score:2)
If you can't provide a truly unlimited service, don't advertise it
They should just adopt a kind of Gabriel Horn's solution to the problem.
Yes you can upload and download as much as you want 24/7, hence unlimited access, but your bandwidth will be reduced in steps based on transferred data, so that in the end you'd only have a few kbps.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm starting to get tired of this mentality from service providers that, just because someone is using their services in ways they didn't expect, they're somehow 'abusing' the service. If you advertise the service as unlimited, it should be unlimited. You shouldn't care that I'm using it to torrent or do whatever.
If you can't provide a truly unlimited service, don't advertise it
Perhaps you don't think it is abusing the network, but I think it is. It's pretty difficult to use 2TB of data in a single month. These people are obviously using their cell phone data plans in lieu of a home network connection. They didn't pay for WiFi hotspot service. T-Mobile allows people to tether for free. A service for which I am greatly appreciative. But if you want to a cellular itnernet hotspot, buy one of T-Mobile's MiFi style plans. Don't turn your cellular phone + data plan into a MiFi p
Re: (Score:2)
T-Mobile Unlimited plans work like this:
* You can use as much data on your cellphone as you want
* However, there is a limit as to how much data you can use with tethered devices
To be fair to T-Mobile, they make this really clear in their plans. People then install software to bypass the tethering limit by manipulating the tether to look like data from the cell phone.
There is nothing sketchy about what T-Mobile is doing here.
Re: (Score:2)
Suppose I need non-stop max cellular bandwidth for a scientific application, and I'm willing to pay my fair share of the cellular network cost for it, then what is the name of the cellular plan that I need to purchase?
I have totally different rules on my company provided mobile hotspot device then I did when I owned one for personal use. I'd start by talking to a business rep and looking into business plans. I work out of a home office, and use consumer Internet but business mobile. If I needed terabytes of connectivity for the broadband side, I'd probably be on a business plan there as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Sprint.
Not a service; the company.
So much for net neutrality (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I think most (all?) carriers have dropped unlimited data plans. Sprint is the only one I'm not sure about.
The remaining people with unlimited plans are grandfathered in (I'm one). Legally, the carrier is not required to continue to keep these people on those grandfathered unlimited plans. O
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
You're right. And the fact it got so much attention lately should have been warning enough for ISPs not to keep basing their "strategies" around it (and by "around it" I mean circumventing net neutrality rules). And the reason it came so late was actually nobody noticing and/or ISPs not providing insight to just how much sniffing is going on. If it wasn't for mobile data cap issues and Netflix complaint we could very well still have that problem today, but unfortunately for them, that problem is gone and th
And if they screw up, good luck getting it fixed (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm with T-Mobile right now. I give them credit for forcing the other carriers to at least pretend to lower the prices on their plans... but it's become apparent to me recently that the way T-Mobile does it is by not training their support personnel *at all*.
T-Mobile recently announced a plan called "10GB North America". It's 4 lines, each with 10GB of data, for $120. And if you sign up before Labor Day, it's $110 because the 4th line is free. Well, I'm having a dickens of a time getting their reps to figure out that there's no way this should amount to $191/month for our four lines (total bill was $226 or thereabouts, but we have one phone on the installment plan).
I have a job - I don't have free hours available to teach these bozos how 3rd grade math works. But I'm going to end up having to print everything out, take time off work, and get those printouts into one of their stores to get this fixed because their phone support and their Twitter support are apparently morons.
Re: (Score:2)
They will jerk you around forever. T-mobile consistently makes "errors" in billing backed with totally untrained staff that allows the company not be he held liable. You will receive a forever circle jerk from them trying to fix their billing "errors".
Best way I've found is to write an exact dialogue of the issue and post it in their forum. Be specific about the issue and your attempts to fix it. Normally a moderator will get it fixed, then dump them.
They are total criminals.
Re: (Score:2)
Big time. It took forever to A.) get them to recognize that I'd returned a Sony Experia, B.) stop billing me for it, and C.) return the money they'd already improperly collected for it. I had the proof that they'd received the returned phone *and* the em
Can anyone clear this up for me? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Technically the latter, but there's only so much bandwidth to go around and in a heavily-populated area there will be a lot of contention for it. Unlike cable, you can't just roll out another trunk line if one of them is getting saturated. Adding more towers may let the phones switch to lower power, reducing interference and allowing more devices to use the same frequencies at once within a city, but adding towers (like rolling out a new line) costs money. Cellular data, like most Internet service, is bille
Re: (Score:2)
AT&T got in trouble for throttling data after reaching a secret limit, which was a
Not unlimited, 7 GB (Score:2)
This is not about people innocently using a lot of data on an unlimited plan. This is a plan that offers unlimited phone data (and, so far, they really do mean unlimited) and 7 GB of high-speed tethered data. (After that, it's automatically throttled.) People in question are very aware of that 7 GB cap because they are installing special apps to circumvent its enforcement. The apps make tethered data look like phone data. That's not innocent and not OK.
Re:Not unlimited, 7 GB (Score:5, Informative)
This is not about people innocently using a lot of data on an unlimited plan. This is a plan that offers unlimited phone data (and, so far, they really do mean unlimited) and 7 GB of high-speed tethered data. (After that, it's automatically throttled.) People in question are very aware of that 7 GB cap because they are installing special apps to circumvent its enforcement. The apps make tethered data look like phone data. That's not innocent and not OK.
Like most things in life, the situation is just a little more complicated than that. Personally, I know about the 7GB cap, and I've never hit it - I use tethering basically the way T-Mobile intended - a provisional internet connection when in a place where I need internet access on my laptop, because my phone doesn't cut it.
One thing worth noting about the difference between 'how laptops use internet' and 'how phones use internet' is that computers will open up TCP connections like they're going out of style, whereas mobile devices are generally optimized to avoid that. The switching gear on the carrier side assumes the latter, not the former. It may not necessarily tax spectrum, but it will tax the networking gear, especially if you're torrenting. "But they should have better infrastructure!" In a perfect world, sure. In the world we presently live in, I do think it's unreasonable to expect them to invest millions of dollars in their infrastructure to address a use case that 1.) affects a very small minority of their users, and 2.) involves violations of their ToS.
However, "installing special apps to circumvent enforcement" is based on a number of assumptions, that may not be correct. I root my phone - XPrivacy is a must for me, as is 'getting rid of Google and Samsung crap, and CarrierIQ'. Sometimes, I'll install a custom ROM. AOSP-based ROMs can't do Wi-Fi calling because of the kernel; it's a pretty good assumption that carrier-customized kernels are required in order to have the T-Mobile tethering meter running. Even the ones which are based on the carrier kernel tend to have things like CarrierIQ and Knox removed; many have the data cap evasion code built in. Furthermore, T-Mobile's default configuration is not very VPN friendly; one must reconfigure their APNs in order to get many forms of VPN functioning.
The question that concerns me is whether it is "well-above-average data usage while tethering" that will cause the wrath of Legere, or simply "the absence of data cap enforcement software". If it is truly the latter, then that is concerning. T-Mobile has traditionally been the most mod-friendly carrier. If they're going to change that tune, they will likely disincentivize remaining a customer to the XDA community...and if that comes to pass, it will be interesting to see how the numbers land.
Re: (Score:2)
it's probably both. they'll turn a blind eye to your technically-a-violation mods (note, this is actually a concern to them of some level; basically every consumer-level service agreement is "service Y in exchange for $X per month and all the personal data we can mine". they just hide the latter part in the fine print.), as long as you don't put a drain on their services. this is how civilization tends to work.
Terms of Service Matter (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They already have been limiting tethering (Score:2)
I have had an unlimited data plan on T-Mobile since May of this year (I called in advance of an upcoming conference and they said it would be about the same price for unlimited as the upgrade I wanted).
SO I get to the conference, and I'm streaming video and so forth and a few days later tethering stops working. Data on the phone works fine, I just can't tether... Then I get on a message on the phone that I've hit a 5GB tethering cap.
I call them up saying I'm at a conference and I really need more tetheri
How can they detect tethering? (Score:2)
If I'm operating over an encrypted connection (like https) how can they determine of the endpoint is the phone or a laptop?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't they already throttle? (Score:2)
I thought T-mobile already throttled data on their unlimited plans once you downloaded a certain amount. Are the 2TB-ers are being throttled? If not, why not. If so, T-mobile should just add another tier of throttling above the one they already have.
How dare they! (Score:2)
How can they assume they could use "unlimited" what is sold to them as "unlimited"? What cheek!
Re: (Score:2)
If everyone does it, it's not competition.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
California is a big place. I get LTE in the all the major cities and most of the smaller ones along the I-5 corridor. You won't get it in the boonies, though; LTE is fast but not good for wide-area coverage. The bands T-Mobile uses for LTE also apparently don't have excellent building penetration, so you may drop to 3G inside some buildings. I get LTE at home and at work just fine, though.
Re:As if T-Mobile can really serve LTE ? (Score:5, Interesting)
California is a big place. I get LTE in the all the major cities and most of the smaller ones along the I-5 corridor. You won't get it in the boonies, though; LTE is fast but not good for wide-area coverage.
The problem is, when you don't get LTE, you also mostly don't get HSDPA. Because T-Mobile's coverage is so shit, you're lucky if you can get EDGE. Which, by the way, doesn't work either. You cannot actually load a webpage over it. Ask me how I know.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yes it is OK.
Carriers carry data. They shouldn't even know if the data is coming from the phone itself or via tethering. Doing so is a violation of net neutrality, and is a bad thing. I'm glad some people go around that arbitrary discrimination of packets.
Re: (Score:2)
P2P is founded on sharing
There's a different word for "sharing" someone else's stuff with yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Technically, P2P networks work by sharing your stuff with others. It's implemented as push rather than pull.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a better term for you: False advertising.
Sell people honestly what they may expect and you have no problem.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, 2 TB is insane. But the point is that if you do not want your users to USE it, you should probably not SELL it.
Re: (Score:3)