Maybe they can crack down on high text message users next... (Score: 1) by entropy@pipedot.org on 2015-09-04 22:28 (#KFR9) Data limits on cellular phones is a fantasy just like per-TXT and per-MMS charges were. They are holding onto it, and people hate it...but unlimited data is what customers demand. Idiocy like some guy using 2TB is not going to dissuade me from the obvious point that they whine about people using over 2GB and want to charge incredibly high rates per GB. Re: Maybe they can crack down on high text message users next... (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-09-05 09:41 (#KGSE) Data limits on cellular phones is a fantasy just like per-TXT and per-MMS charges were. They are holding onto it, and people hate it...but unlimited data is what customers demand.I don't demand unlimited cellular data... not at all. I can spend most of my time on WiFi and use hardly any cellular data. Instead, I would much rather have lower monthly fees. I know I'm not alone, as many MVNOs (like Republic Wireless) that offer a cheap plan with no data allowance, find those plans overwhelmingly popular with their customers... I, however, would like to have some small amount of cellular data to use.Back when plans charged fees per-SMS (text message), I just didn't send many of those. I recently switched from a plan with free MMS to one that charges, so I just don't use MMS anymore. Now that it's all about data, I'm happy to cash-in on cheap cell plans with unlimited talk/text/etc., and just be careful to keep my cellular data usage extremely low.Pay-per-SMS plans were ridiculous, because they were nearly free to the telco. But it makes perfect sense that data usage dominates the costs of current cellular providers, and it is inherently a constrained resource that needs to be limited. Re: Maybe they can crack down on high text message users next... (Score: 1) by wootery@pipedot.org on 2015-09-06 15:29 (#KKW8) Pay-per-SMS plans were ridiculous, because they were nearly free to the telco. But it makes perfect sense that data usage dominates the costs of current cellular providers, and it is inherently a constrained resource that needs to be limited.Careful not to ignore the other side of the story here: it's not just about bandwidth contention.Telcos have to build and maintain the infrastructure in the first place. Crazy example time: if the government banned phone-calls and mobile-data, SMS would still be 'nearly free' in the sense you use it, but the telcos would still have to recover their infrastrucure costs, so they wouldn't be able to sell SMS-only packages for super cheap. Re: Maybe they can crack down on high text message users next... (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-09-06 15:41 (#KKXA) The cell networks would be designed very differently, and much less expensive to deploy and maintain, if they only needed SMS. Look at trusty old alphanumeric pagers for an example. They wouldn't be able to offer all their service for free, but awfully cheap. Without all the other services, their billing and support costs would be vastly lower, bandwidth needs vastly lower, etc. They could make it a very, very inexpensive service.
Re: Maybe they can crack down on high text message users next... (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-09-05 09:41 (#KGSE) Data limits on cellular phones is a fantasy just like per-TXT and per-MMS charges were. They are holding onto it, and people hate it...but unlimited data is what customers demand.I don't demand unlimited cellular data... not at all. I can spend most of my time on WiFi and use hardly any cellular data. Instead, I would much rather have lower monthly fees. I know I'm not alone, as many MVNOs (like Republic Wireless) that offer a cheap plan with no data allowance, find those plans overwhelmingly popular with their customers... I, however, would like to have some small amount of cellular data to use.Back when plans charged fees per-SMS (text message), I just didn't send many of those. I recently switched from a plan with free MMS to one that charges, so I just don't use MMS anymore. Now that it's all about data, I'm happy to cash-in on cheap cell plans with unlimited talk/text/etc., and just be careful to keep my cellular data usage extremely low.Pay-per-SMS plans were ridiculous, because they were nearly free to the telco. But it makes perfect sense that data usage dominates the costs of current cellular providers, and it is inherently a constrained resource that needs to be limited. Re: Maybe they can crack down on high text message users next... (Score: 1) by wootery@pipedot.org on 2015-09-06 15:29 (#KKW8) Pay-per-SMS plans were ridiculous, because they were nearly free to the telco. But it makes perfect sense that data usage dominates the costs of current cellular providers, and it is inherently a constrained resource that needs to be limited.Careful not to ignore the other side of the story here: it's not just about bandwidth contention.Telcos have to build and maintain the infrastructure in the first place. Crazy example time: if the government banned phone-calls and mobile-data, SMS would still be 'nearly free' in the sense you use it, but the telcos would still have to recover their infrastrucure costs, so they wouldn't be able to sell SMS-only packages for super cheap. Re: Maybe they can crack down on high text message users next... (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-09-06 15:41 (#KKXA) The cell networks would be designed very differently, and much less expensive to deploy and maintain, if they only needed SMS. Look at trusty old alphanumeric pagers for an example. They wouldn't be able to offer all their service for free, but awfully cheap. Without all the other services, their billing and support costs would be vastly lower, bandwidth needs vastly lower, etc. They could make it a very, very inexpensive service.
Re: Maybe they can crack down on high text message users next... (Score: 1) by wootery@pipedot.org on 2015-09-06 15:29 (#KKW8) Pay-per-SMS plans were ridiculous, because they were nearly free to the telco. But it makes perfect sense that data usage dominates the costs of current cellular providers, and it is inherently a constrained resource that needs to be limited.Careful not to ignore the other side of the story here: it's not just about bandwidth contention.Telcos have to build and maintain the infrastructure in the first place. Crazy example time: if the government banned phone-calls and mobile-data, SMS would still be 'nearly free' in the sense you use it, but the telcos would still have to recover their infrastrucure costs, so they wouldn't be able to sell SMS-only packages for super cheap. Re: Maybe they can crack down on high text message users next... (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-09-06 15:41 (#KKXA) The cell networks would be designed very differently, and much less expensive to deploy and maintain, if they only needed SMS. Look at trusty old alphanumeric pagers for an example. They wouldn't be able to offer all their service for free, but awfully cheap. Without all the other services, their billing and support costs would be vastly lower, bandwidth needs vastly lower, etc. They could make it a very, very inexpensive service.
Re: Maybe they can crack down on high text message users next... (Score: 1) by evilviper@pipedot.org on 2015-09-06 15:41 (#KKXA) The cell networks would be designed very differently, and much less expensive to deploy and maintain, if they only needed SMS. Look at trusty old alphanumeric pagers for an example. They wouldn't be able to offer all their service for free, but awfully cheap. Without all the other services, their billing and support costs would be vastly lower, bandwidth needs vastly lower, etc. They could make it a very, very inexpensive service.