AT&T has lost their minds

[Brutus2600]

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Exclusive-ATT-To-Impose-150GB-DSL-Cap-Overages-113149

They've gotta be f*cking joking. I've heard MUSINGS of this idea, had no idea it was actually going to be implemented.

I mean, I doubt I even hit half of the limit a month, but it sets a really crappy precedent.

Actually, if they combine upload/download, then yeah, I might be close to the 250gb limit.

Sigh :fl:fl:bh

[HollywoodQue]

This is some real Bullsh!t, what's next!!!!

[Starz26]

Why would they put a cap on the users of UVerse? I mean all movies on demand are set via the internet right on uverse? Will that count as data as well. As I understand it the saved shows from your DVR is stored remotly as well.

While i understand in theory what they want to do, I would also like to see the numbers. I find it hard to believe the 2% of the customers are slowing down the system in any way. IF cost is an issue, the other 98% would be recovering the cost of the power users.....

Curious as to what the real motivation is here...seems to me they just want to make more money in any way they can...

Still not as bad as Verizon, having an unlimited plan but saying in fine print cap was at 5gb. Then they took it down to 3gb for a cheaper monthly fee and charged overages at outrageous rates. something like .10 per meganyte or thats $100.00 a gigabyte....

Voise no longer makes money, txt's bring in a lot of dough, but not so much now that you can get unlimited...Phones are locked so you have to by vz apps from their store, now they are going for the money hole in data....

Rather than nit pick fees, provide a great device / service that allows the owner of the device to do what they want with it. Create a great experience. ever been toa VZ store lately, horrible experience. Make the VZ brand and store a place peope want to go, a place that has innovating tech things...That will bring in more money than nickel and diming everyone which untimatly looses customers....

Sorry for the typos and rambling, tired and off to bed....

[Bill86]

Comcast supposedly caps bandwidth usage, hmmm mine was 2 terabytes last month. We'll see if I can break that this month. Apparently they don't charge yet but they certainly ***** about it. I don't get it I pay for the Internet whatever I do is my business.

[Brutus2600]

Why would they put a cap on the users of UVerse? I mean all movies on demand are set via the internet right on uverse? Will that count as data as well. As I understand it the saved shows from your DVR is stored remotly as well.

While i understand in theory what they want to do, I would also like to see the numbers. I find it hard to believe the 2% of the customers are slowing down the system in any way. IF cost is an issue, the other 98% would be recovering the cost of the power users.....

Curious as to what the real motivation is here...seems to me they just want to make more money in any way they can...

I don't think that UVerse would count the TV. Yes, it all comes over the same line, but it's different. I think they're just talking data usage.

Also, as nice as remote DVR would be, that's not the case either. The main receiver has a hard drive in it and the other boxes in your house stream from that box, so it's all local. That also means if that box dies, all your shows are gone.

So anyway, yeah, more than likely just data, but it's still f*cked up.

If there was ANY other choice in my area I'd switch in an instant. Unfortunately that's not the case :td

[jledou]

250gb must be their "unlimited" plan. I will wait to get my notice ... I would say that I would switch but unfortunately their competition here is Comcast ... net neutrality and a need for isps that are not content providers would be nice. Unfortunately I still see this getting worse rather than better.

[Starz26]

I don't think that UVerse would count the TV.

Also, as nice as remote DVR would be, that's not the case either. The main receiver has a hard drive in it and the other boxes in your house stream from that box, so it's all local. That also means if that box dies, all your shows are gone.



Thanks for clearing that up. I know TWC uses remote DVR storage and I assumed ATT did as well....

[tedrodgerscpa]

Wow.

I guess I understand the cap on wireless a little bit better, but this seems a bit of an extreme move.

Why not just "fire" those users who cheat the system (a la creating their own ISP, for instance)

I do hope the rest of the providers don't follow suit. I love teh internets.

[neoflex]

Wow, to think I was just thinking about taking a look at U-Verse but not now. I work out of my home and am constantly uploading files to ftps around the country and outside of the country so I would more than likely have an issue with them. I have heard rumblings of cell providers charging by tiers on data usage on their 4G networks but this is downright ridiculous. Hopefully enough people abandon ship with Uverse so the other providers don't get any ideas to follow suite.

[treatneggy]

Comcast supposedly caps bandwidth usage, hmmm mine was 2 terabytes last month. We'll see if I can break that this month. Apparently they don't charge yet but they certainly ***** about it. I don't get it I pay for the Internet whatever I do is my business.

Comcast's limits in this area are around 250GB. I've already been shut off once for hitting 400GB, before they openly admitted they even had caps.

[BloodSpite]

Once upon a time I used to install U-verse in Northwest Akrkansas (2008-2009) for AT&T.

I use wireless for my primary ISP. I had satellite up until a few months ago but the 24 hour data cap that HughesNet uses was killing me for school. So i got Verizon as via their cell system and it works quite nice save for the 10 gig per billing period limit. Every month I'm skating by within 50 meg of hitting my limit.

U-verse takes a fiber optic cable and runs it to a DSLAM in your neighborhood (unless your one of the fortunate few to have Fiber going to your house) After that DSLAM it runs on the existing telephone lines to your home.

Each home has a dedicated pairing, that goes back to the node, which of course is converted to fiber optic.

What I'm trying to say without getting too technical is, Until it gets back to the main switch your not sharing allocation of data or voice with anyone. Your RG does all the translation. The RG gives you the Voice over IP, your Television, and your HPNA (if the installer was foolish/lazy enough to use Coax). It basically turns your home in to a sort of a networked Home theater is a good way of explaining it. Again no lines being shared, no data being passed and while the HPNA system works on a TDMA schema thats only within your home not your neighborhood.

In short, this charge is just a way for Randal Stephenson Mr. "People in America are too Stupid to work for us so I have to outsource to India" to make another buck.

Makes me glad I quit heh

[Volusianator]

Sweet, I work for Time Warner Cable, let the calls begin!

[kickerb]

yep, i have the comcast 250gb cap too. but they dont monitor it unless you are in a very high volume location, im not. so i get about 1tb a month with no problems from comcast.

[Blueface]

Can someone break this down a bit?
How does this translate to me as AT&T Uverse with Internet?
Is it going to limit my TV or my wireless Internet access or both?
How will I know my current monthly usage to compare?

[DennisP]

Can someone break this down a bit?
How does this translate to me as AT&T Uverse with Internet?
Is it going to limit my TV or my wireless Internet access or both?
How will I know my current monthly usage to compare?

It likely won't affect you in any way. If it does they will give you notice, I believe the article said at 65%, 90% and 100% of usage and you need to exceed it 3 times before you get charged.

I have more of a problem with what is in store in the future especially as we will be streaming more and more than I do in the short term.

[T.G]

Carlos,

Not sure at the present time if TV and data are lumped together for U-Verse caps.

If they are, watching just a few hours of Hi-Def TV per day would to run up to the limits long before the end of the month, which leads me to speculate that TV and data might very well be separate.

AT&T is rolling out some new online tools for their users to check account usage and they are supposedly going to send email notifications to users when they hit, I believe it's 65%, 80%, 90% of max usage per month.

[jledou]

Specifically where this hits and hurts is:
Downloading, online gaming and streaming.
Downloading:music, movies - digital instead of DvD or Blu-Ray, books, podcast - even more so on video podcast, purchasing software via download and not a disk.
Online gaming - Onlive becomes not practical - games like WoW, EvE on-line and other MMORPGs will have a harder time.
Steaming - Pandora, Netflix, Youtube
Thinking about where the future is moving as far as fluid digital content and not owning a disk etc this is a bigger deal than it seems today.
You may not do all of the above but when we do a couple they can start to add up quickly.
Now add the kids into this mix as they grow up online and consume more data as they get older. Could make internet for a family of 4 really pricey.
And lets not forget that AT&T was generous enough to raise their monthly internet fees $5/month last month....

[Kreth]

Pool on the filing date of the class-action suit from gamers and heavy Netflix streaming customers? :r
Posted via Mobile Device

[Christiel49]

Pool on the filing date of the class-action suit from gamers and heavy Netflix streaming customers? :r
Posted via Mobile Device

:tpd: Q2 2012 :r This is obsurd, but if you look at is a shift in the economy of entertainment it flows. Everyone is out to take every f'ing penny we earn, but we are not getting the proper adjustment in wages!!!!

[357]

Pool on the filing date of the class-action suit from gamers and heavy Netflix streaming customers? :r
Posted via Mobile Device

That's what I was thinking. Now that NetFlix streaming of hi-def movies is becoming very popular, AT&T is finding a way to get more money out of those customers. :bs


BTW, a single layer blue-ray disc can hold 25 GB of data. That means you could be limited on your viewing, simply by your ISP.

[Blueface]

Crap!
I just got my Apple TV and am streaming Netflix movies.

[DennisP]

Crap!
I just got my Apple TV and am streaming Netflix movies.

That's the main reason behind this. ATT wants people to buy their movies on demand, not get them elsewhere.

[Brutus2600]

Oh absolutely. The business reasoning behind it is genius. They say 2% of their customer base are the only ones being affected. So say 10% of those have the option or motivation to change providers when the limit goes into effect...that's only 0.2% of their total customer base that they'll potentially lose. They'll save on bandwidth, then entice the rest of their customers to use THEIR on demand stuff instead of Netflix/Hulu/Etc, increasing their revenues in that area as well.

Trust me, even though I probably rarely get close to the 250gb limit, out of principle I would switch providers if I had the option, but I don't even have another DSL provider option in my area, much less fiber or cable provider.

The joys of living on the outskirts of town :td

[BloodSpite]

Oh absolutely. The business reasoning behind it is genius. They say 2% of their customer base are the only ones being affected. So say 10% of those have the option or motivation to change providers when the limit goes into effect...that's only 0.2% of their total customer base that they'll potentially lose. They'll save on bandwidth, then entice the rest of their customers to use THEIR on demand stuff instead of Netflix/Hulu/Etc, increasing their revenues in that area as well.

Trust me, even though I probably rarely get close to the 250gb limit, out of principle I would switch providers if I had the option, but I don't even have another DSL provider option in my area, much less fiber or cable provider.

The joys of living on the outskirts of town :td

I feel your pain. Even having swapped to Verizon it is still next to impossible for me to watch NetFlix (save for DVD's) I can't use probably a 3rd of Xbox Live functions, and the same with my Playstation.

As more and more industries go to web driven and stream driven content it becomes harder and harder to operate in the rural parts of America, especially with these data caps. I'm too far out for any wire driven access, at current. It's either cellular or satellite, and satellite quite frankly is not even close to being worth the cost after having had it for a year.

[Kreth]

That's the main reason behind this. ATT wants people to buy their movies on demand, not get them elsewhere.
I'd expect Netflix and other streaming providers to get involved as soon as they start getting complaints from customers who can't download the unlimited content that they're paying for.
This is like a restaurant advertising an all-you-can-eat buffet, then telling you that you're only allowed two trips because 2% of their customers are hogging the King Crab legs. :rolleyes:
Posted via Mobile Device

[lbowles2]

It has always been the case that a very small portion of an ISP's customer use most of their bandwidth so I don't blame them for putting a bandwidth cap on. My problem is that 250MB is pretty small even for most users. Most months that would be fine but what about when Microsoft releases a service pack for either Windows or Office? Windows 7 SP1 can be around 100MB. Almost half your bandwidth allotment is gone after that. I think 500MB would be realistic.

[Brutus2600]

Larry, it's 250 gigs, not megs :) Trust me, if it was megs I would be dropping AT&T like a rock and signing up for dial up.

[Jhooker]

All I can say is Roku, hulu plus, and Netflix $16.00 a month for all and no bs.

[kydsid]

I'd expect Netflix and other streaming providers to get involved as soon as they start getting complaints from customers who can't download the unlimited content that they're paying for.
This is like a restaurant advertising an all-you-can-eat buffet, then telling you that you're only allowed two trips because 2% of their customers are hogging the King Crab legs. :rolleyes:
Posted via Mobile Device


how? they both have seperate functions.

what it is really like is a cheap restaraunt that you can only get to via a toll road. who nneds whom more in that analogy or here? att and the provders have all the cards really. content is easy to fill
Posted via Mobile Device

[shilala]

I'd expect Netflix and other streaming providers to get involved as soon as they start getting complaints from customers who can't download the unlimited content that they're paying for.
This is like a restaurant advertising an all-you-can-eat buffet, then telling you that you're only allowed two trips because 2% of their customers are hogging the King Crab legs. :rolleyes:
Posted via Mobile Device
Netflix and other streaming providers are actually the source of the issue.
ISP's want a taste of the streaming revenue. It's been a big issue for some time now. As the streaming outfits get more and more customers, the isp's have to dump more and more money into developing infrastructure to support the much greater demand for data.
They really do have a legitimate gripe, depending how you look at it.
Take Netflix, for instance. They are pouring tons and tons of data into the pipe. The more they dump, the bigger pipe the ISP has to provide, and their profits go down while Netflix profits swell.
The only thing they can do to muscle money out of Netflix is to make it inaccessible to their customers. If the consumer can't use it, they won't buy it.
It'll take awhile before this strategy gains any weight, but soon they'll have a gun to Netflix's head, and maybe they'll start sharing revenue.
I think Netflix would be nuts to cave in. If they do, we as customers lose. The isp's will never become competitive until the whole deal becomes completely deregulated, anyway.
This type of thing isn't a problem in other countries because there's true competition between the isp's. The best service wins, and consumers have options. Because of FCC regulation here, providers are left spending all their time and money fighting over their piece of the pie, rather than building a bigger pie.
As demand for data increases, it'll reach a point where the FCC will have to loosen the knoose. Expect that to happen when it becomes a big enough problem that the people are willing to allow a tax on data flow.
As with everything, there's always a big, complicated mess behind what's happening. This thing is a lot more complicated, but it boils down to greed and government, just like usual.
Please excuse me if that last comment sounds political. It's not meant to be at all. It's just my opinion on the condition of the condition. :tu

[lbowles2]

Larry, it's 250 gigs, not megs :) Trust me, if it was megs I would be dropping AT&T like a rock and signing up for dial up.

Wow... I should just go back to bed...
I probably shouldn't do this but I will admit that I am a network admin.

Again I say... I should just go back to bed.... :sl

[Devanmc]

Netflix and other streaming providers are actually the source of the issue.
ISP's want a taste of the streaming revenue. It's been a big issue for some time now.

I get everyone wants to make money but one company doesnt need and IMO shouldnt do everything. Cuz then it just creates problems like this one. Do one thing, do it well and people will come... :sh

And doesn't netflix have to pay an ISP for its use of the pipe aswell? I mean its not like they own it or something, they have to pay for internet like i do(in some twisted way, like paying for ISP bandwidth usage). So the ISP would is making money off both of us. Maybe i dont know enough about servers and the web.

[jledou]

Scott,
The UK and other countries are starting to see data caps as well in some of the companies. Unlike us though there are other choices that still offer unlimited plans.
Netflix and other companies are currently covered under peering agreements between companies (basically I allow your stuff to run on my network if you allow my stuff to run on yours). ISPs do get paid by both content providers and content consumers they just want to get paid more for certain types of content ... I would still call this a net neutrality issue and a fact that ISPs have not invested in upgrading their backbone as content increased.

[Brutus2600]

Scott,
The UK and other countries are starting to see data caps as well in some of the companies. Unlike us though there are other choices that still offer unlimited plans.
Netflix and other companies are currently covered under peering agreements between companies (basically I allow your stuff to run on my network if you allow my stuff to run on yours). ISPs do get paid by both content providers and content consumers they just want to get paid more for certain types of content ... I would still call this a net neutrality issue and a fact that ISPs have not invested in upgrading their backbone as content increased.

Bingo.

[shilala]

Scott,
The UK and other countries are starting to see data caps as well in some of the companies. Unlike us though there are other choices that still offer unlimited plans.
Netflix and other companies are currently covered under peering agreements between companies (basically I allow your stuff to run on my network if you allow my stuff to run on yours). ISPs do get paid by both content providers and content consumers they just want to get paid more for certain types of content ... I would still call this a net neutrality issue and a fact that ISPs have not invested in upgrading their backbone as content increased.
I'm sure the cost of infrastructure upgrade in the US is incredible and mui prohibitive based on the population density (compared to the UK, for instance), but being as we're accustomed to getting raped for an inferior product, there's little shouting going on.
Caps will come and go in those other markets, and I imagine they're temporary fixes until the pipe can catch up to the volume. If there's competitors, someone is going to be standing by to take care of the people and some companies just aren't going to survive.
Point being, the infrastructure will expand quickly in those dense competitive markets. Not here.

[BloodSpite]

I'm sure the cost of infrastructure upgrade in the US is incredible and mui prohibitive based on the population density (compared to the UK, for instance), but being as we're accustomed to getting raped for an inferior product, there's little shouting going on.
Caps will come and go in those other markets, and I imagine they're temporary fixes until the pipe can catch up to the volume. If there's competitors, someone is going to be standing by to take care of the people and some companies just aren't going to survive.
Point being, the infrastructure will expand quickly in those dense competitive markets. Not here.

I can assure you cost is a major factor

One of the first things I learned when I got in to telecom is that carriers do not like to fix things if they work. Period. In parts of California there are still the old 1940 manual switching mechanism in use. When you hear the audible "clicks" on your phone before ringing, it means your call passed through a similar system. Your hearing the connection being made physically versus digitally.

AT&T doesn't do themselves any favors on the wireless side with their turf pricing for contractors. For a good example, AT&T is basically the Wal Mart of wireless carriers when it comes to other companies. I have seen more tower companies and towers crews literally ground out of existence trying to float the note for a AT&T roll out.

U-verse is the last gasp for AT&T's wire line services. With the monumental decrease in wire line use by folks swapping to their cell phones for their primary communication device, we as consumers set our own selves up for failure.

[marge796]

This is the last straw. I'm out, we have two iphones, uverse, home phone and internet service. They have just lost a 10+ year customer. And when they ask why I'm canceling all of my services I'm going to give them both barrels & reload. NOT HAPPY!!!!!!


:fl :fl :fl :fl :fl


Chris.....

[ucla695]

:td :td