"AT&T Says Forget About Cheaper Data Rates For The iPhone 3G S" [mocoNews.net]
]]>I just don't get how people justify spending that much a month, especially these days.
]]>- extra charge for tethering
- txt message charges
- contracts with the 'subsidy' excuse, when the handset's cost is actually recouped in a very small amount of time
- voice plan charges
to avoid the monopoly, the network would have to belong to the government, and the bureaucratic inefficiency introduced would be pretty great, costing the companies leasing the network either a good amount of input costs or a heavy burden on the taxpayer, not to mention that there would be very slow improvements on technology.
to have the network under the control of a single private firm would be an absolutely terrible idea. even though the company would enjoy a very good economy of scale, it would have little incentive to improve on the network. the only thing keeping the telcos on constant upgrade is competition, even if it's poor competition.
and how is that a waste of GDP? GDP = output = income = jobs. no matter where it comes from, it is good for the economy. even though GDP from competitive firms helps more than GDP from not-as-competitive firms.
]]>@bilups: oh, and that $83/mo on Verizon inludes NO Texts, NO data. So F them.
]]>@LandonPegasus: The family plan of 550 minutes plus unlmtd data on the iphone (plus rollover) is $90/month. Right now, on verizon, I pay $83/mo for 700 minutes. Personally I think the ATT plan is perfectly reasonable - especially since I and my wife use only about 300 non-mobile-to-mobile minutes in a month.
I looked at the Pre - but their cheapest family plan was 1000 minutes for around $150 / month. sorry, don't need that much.
]]>hmm....Sweden uses that for its far superior mobile network and pricing is very competitive, same thing with cable, internet, phones.....we always complain and say well other countries pay high taxes but if you compare what you pay for everything else their tax dollars actually GET you something for it.
]]>It's hard to grasp (give up) by carriers and until someone pushes them on it, they won't have to give it up.
]]>It feels anti-competitive because the iphone is so far advanced from any other carriers phone and it looks like it will remain that way for some time.
I wasn't interested in an iphone - a phone is a phone, right? Wrong. After I played with one, it was amazing. I have a data plan on Sprint. It looks like the dark ages.
Even on a "friends" plan plus data I'm looking at the same price for At&t. I really don't like At&t. There's no competition (except I just discovered tmobiles support).
]]>I have friends that have been all impressed when they were able to score an employer discount on the iPhone... they are still paying $1500/year on service.
Family of 5 over 3 years... $200/phone + $250/month = 10K before taxes, fees, overages, and accessories.
]]>"In the end, less competition and/or less reward for companies means that less cool phones and new features will be available to you."
Actually no, the handset manufacturers are just as screwed in this whole game. The cell companies often make them dumb down their devices ( hello MMS for the iphone anyone / Verizon and BT features ). The fact that US consumers have been getting high-end phones is driven by, virtually, contract only pricing.
Far to often, unfortunately, those high end phones end up crippled when used in the US. In EU you can get unlimited 384kbps data for $10/month off-contract, probably less in some places.
]]>what happened to Stan Sigman?, was he dropped when AT&T came to?
]]>@pecan 3.14159265: Seriously? Wow. I live in a niche market in Canada (one city in the enitre province, maybe 450k total population), and I've got 550 minutes, unlim N&W at 5 PM, and completely unlimited data (including text) for $60/mo. $40 for 450 minutes, PLUS data, seems completely unreasonable for a major US carrier, when we're talking smartphones.
]]>As far as the iPhone coming to Verizon, don't hold your breath. Even if they had LTE right now, I don't think Verizon could resist messing with the user experience and disabling everything that would permit their customers to bypass a Verizon toll booth. And quite honestly, that's what has caused me to look at the iPhone. I'm tired of Verizon's profit motives taking good phones and devices and intentionally crippling them.
It's a shame too that I trade Verizon's wonderful coverage for a device that functions as the manufacturer intended.
]]>@magic8ball: If people aren't happy, they certainly aren't showing it where it counts, by voting with their wallets.
]]>We were going to upgrade to Pres, but found a month-long wait. We couldn't wait that long, as I was going to add a line for my fiance, who was currently phone-less.
We walked over to ATT, played around with the iPhone, and was quoted ~145 after tax for two phones - that's with a 21% corporate discount.
I refused to pay 180 a month for phone service - but 145 is a bit more manageable, and what we were prepared to pay on Sprint's Simply Everything Plan.
Those corporate discounts can really take the edge off.
]]>It's mind boggling that the concept of an unlocked phone is so hard to grasp by the American consumers.
]]>Good for them for not budging. Unless of course, they plan to lower data prices for the BlackBerry too. Then I say bring it on.
]]>@pecan 3.14159265: Agreed, My wife and I have been long term ATT customers. I was able to keep my lower minute plan that ATT no longer offers, for less money than their current lowest minute plan (and way more minutes than we use anyway). I also get a discount through my employer. Two iPhones with unlimited Data, and one with an Enterprise plan and our monthly bill is about $130/month or about $65/phone.
I have a 550 minutes/month, and use only about 200/month (most of my minutes are mobile to mobile which are free), and I have a pool of nearly 3000 roll over minutes incase I go over my alotment.
My iPhones replaced 2 Razr phones and a PDA - Data only account. Getting the iPhones actually saved us $10/month and gave both of us a data plan.
]]>I think that your quasi-public system would still suffer the same challenges faced by private competition -- namely, deciding how best to deploy their capital and assets to maximize return -- it really doesn't matter whether the return is measured in money of 'the public good'.
In the end, less competition and/or less reward for companies means that less cool phones and new features will be available to you. I respect that the pricing seems like it screws the customers -- and sometimes it does (e.g., per usage text msg charges), but in the end, a lot of that money goes to subsidizing new phones or rolling out the next generation technology we're desperately waiting to see
]]>I don't get it. Forking over 500 bucks, and then spending about 1200 bucks a year for what? Yakity yak? I'd rather spend that 1700 bucks on a vacation, or invest it. That's just me, but still, whats the big deal about I-phones that make it worth 2 grand a year?
]]>Anti-competitive comes into play when a product or company has substantial share and their actions can be demonstrated to have impacted the overall product/service space. For example, bundling IE with Windows when Windows has a huge market share is anti-competitive, but Safari bundled with OS X isn't (yet).
]]>ATT has always charged $30 for it's 3G/PDA data. And the first iphone used the $15 Medianet/EDGE data w/ $5 200 Text tacked on to no choice of yours.
I don't have a huge problem w/ the $30 data. My problem is that my city still does not have 3G. I think more than the price being wrong it's ATT charging people like me for premium data I can't use.
My other issue is more the voice plan. I only use 150-200 minutes a month. ATT should figure that lots of people with feature phones use them more for data/text than voice and give us a cheaper voice plan.
I would be fine paying $30 for data if I could get 300 minutes for $25.
Another area in need of review is text. $5 for a whopping 200? Doesn't Sprint give you 300 for $5? And Sprint offers a $10/1000 pack which ATT does not.
Yeah,data is fine, it's voice and text that need some adjustments.
]]>I only ask because one of the primary reasons we wanted to change carriers was because we weren't actually using the 600 minutes or so that was on the most basic plan. So almost half of those minutes were going to waste, and we needed to reduce our minutes - unfortunately, Verizon didn't offer less minutes, and was charging more for the most basic plan. AT&T had fewer minutes and charged less for them.
]]>Since they don't have the iPhone, use SIM cards, and I don't like the Blackberry, I went with AT&T. I knew the prices, I dealt with it.
I did actually price a Blackberry on Verizon, in case I changed my mind. And I would've been spending more on a Blackberry on Verizon than I would have an iPhone on AT&T because they charge more for the very lowest number of minutes on a family plan.
]]>Apple making the iphone available to everybody after the 5 year exclusivity plan sunsets.
]]>heh... the data plan was $20/month when it launched. Guess they hooked more people for more money later.
If you think $30/month is a lot, dick around on youtube for a few hours on an iPhone without a data plan and check out that bill.
]]>@madgoat: It could be worse. The carriers could restrict calls to those only on their network.
]]>@realserendipity: Same here.
]]>Anybody have experience using an iPhone with Cricket Wireless? Assuming, of course, one can overlook not getting "visual voice mail" that will have to remain exclusive to AT&T.
]]>Blackberry Data x 2 = $60 (and that's just Blackberry Personal, not Enterprise, which runs more) + $89.99 a month for 1400 minutes (which is the standard) and unlimited N&W = $149.99 a month. And that's with no text messaging.
]]>Think this: quasi-public/private entity buys up the wireless spectrum and towers and creates an operating company and leases the use of it to what are todays carriers, removing the burden for them to maintain multiple, parallel systems. The single system is coast-to-coast and uses best-of-breed technologies by openly soliciting proposals for the various technologies. This operating company spends the capital to keep the system working and up to date. They have a mandate to operate revenue-neutral and keep the network state of the art with high availability.
Incumbent carriers in return for not running the system lease the use of it and compete by offering packages, devices, content and service. They simply become resellers. The ones who can adapt and thrive in this environment win, the ones who cannot lose. New entrants into this market are also no longer encumbered by high capital costs of entry. In the end all this ends up costing everyone on aggregate less and frees up capital for investment somewhere more innovative.
]]>I'm headed to Verizon for my wireless, and if I had the option I'd be switching to another ILEC.
]]>And if anyone really thought AT&T was going to get any nicer, reasonable or care about humanity when they got the IPhone contract, think again, their brain process economically wasn't unlike a child molester / sex offender getting out of the penn and walking past the preschool on the way to the halfway house...
I can say that - they bent me over when they became Cingular - and wouldn't then let me use the $400 Motorola phone I just purchased and spent 5 hours programming the week before, and wouldn't refund my money either.
AT&T partnership is the WORST thing Apple has EVER done to it's fans.
]]>I just got a quote to get two Iphones for me and the husband last night. $400 for the phones and $200 a month for service. Currently I pay $100 a month for two Blackberry with data plans and 1400 minutes. Guess whose not moving?
]]>I'd love to switch my plan to an iPhone and give AT&T more money, but they put up so many financial hurdles that it just isn't practical.
]]>The US cellphone market as a whole is f#*$ed up...you should be able to go to a store, buy a phone at a reasonable price (a bit higher than the "subsidized" price but lower than the exorbitant non-contract price), and use the phone with whatever carriers that support the phone's standard (GSM/CDMA). Not to mention all of the issues that the iPhone/Touch has...no freedom to run software or use wireless providers that Apple doesn't want you to, and that Apple deliberately attempts to sabotage your phone if you use it otherwise.
]]>Well, duh. Of course AT&T is happy with it. The problem is too many other people aren't.
]]>true, then your warranty is void and you're SOL but true
how do I buy it without signing up for a contract?
]]>just wait until next year when iPhone goes CDMA
]]>