🚀 go-pugleaf

John Navas wrote:
> <http://pocketnow.com/tech-news/att-to-solve-network-woes-by-charging-power-users-more>:
> 
> If you're a heavy consumer of AT&T's mobile 3G bandwidth, be prepared to
> shell out more money for the privilege of the network's advertised
> "unlimited internet access" on your smartphone. As AT&T is trying to
> correct its network problems, mainly in San Francisco and New York,
> where users have complained that AT&T's speed and reliability claims are
> not up to standards, the carrier will be addressing the network fixes by
> deferring the costs in doing so to power users. According to the
> carrier, 3% of the network's mobile data users use about 40% of the
> carrier's bandwidth.
> 
> Additionally, while we're talking about network upgrades, the carrier
> will be upgrading its HSPA 3G network, ahead of its 4G LTE roll out, to
> download speeds of 7 Mbps. The carrier is boasting that it has a dozen
> devices in its lineup--including the iPhone 3GS--that can handle the 7
> Mbps downloads and that more devices will be coming under way. Of
> course, if you're using one of those "advanced devices"--to borrow
> Verizon Wireless' lingo--you'll probably want to use it to the max and
> consume more data, shifting you into the greedy 3% category.
> 
> It looks like the carrier will be using tiered pricing moving into the
> future, which isn't a novel idea at all since AT&T already offers a
> tiered structure on its price: $30 for smartphones and $15 for
> non-smartphone devices for unlimited data.

       This is because it's cheaper to charge more than to 
upgrade their system to handle the load. I suspect this will 
open the door for other wireless carriers to provide unlimited 
service or offer better deals on capped service.

       I do believe that the FCC is looking at allocating more 
of the spectrum to wireless service providers and this may help 
the situation.

John

"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message 
news:s95lo5l3ll33hn2rvsagksb174f3j147dt@navasgroup.com...
> <http://pocketnow.com/tech-news/att-to-solve-network-woes-by-charging-power-users-more>:

<snip>

Isn't posting an item from early December (particularly one discussed here 
thoroughly at the time) stretching the definition of "news" slightly?

Todd Allcock wrote:
> 
> "John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message 
> news:s95lo5l3ll33hn2rvsagksb174f3j147dt@navasgroup.com...
>> <http://pocketnow.com/tech-news/att-to-solve-network-woes-by-charging-power-users-more>: 
>>
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Isn't posting an item from early December (particularly one discussed 
> here thoroughly at the time) stretching the definition of "news" slightly?

Only for normal people.