AT&T speed and data greed: Throttling limits on 'unlimited' data users
Summary: AT&T has -- at long last -- opened up about its mobile data limits for its "unlimited" plans. How unlimited are these plans, and are the limits fair?
AT&T has explained and clarified how "unlimited" its unlimited mobile data plans are.
The company said that HSPA+ users who use more than 3GB per month, and 4G LTE users who rack up more than 5GB per month, will find that their speeds will be throttled after the limit is reached, and a text message warning is issued.
The mobile giant, currently the second largest in the United States, manages to advertise and get away with "unlimited" plans in its marketing material because it does in fact offer no limits on how much data you can consume. It does, on the other hand, limit data speeds after a user reaches a certain point.
Arguably, that is.
Speeds will return to normal after the billing cycle is over, which is often the next calendar month.
But the courts didn't agree. AT&T recently lost a case in a California small claims court after the mobile giant was forced to pay a subscriber $850 in costs. AT&T was found to be "improperly" limiting the user's mobile download speeds when they were paying for an unlimited tariff.
It makes sense for AT&T, like other networks, to limit the data speeds of its users when they reach a certain amount. The very most will never reach the limits, as the network highlights that 95 percent of its customers will not be affected.
As AT&T has well over 100 million subscribers, and 17 million customers on "unlimited" data plans. This means at least 850,000 users will be affected. It's a lot of people, but still in the minority.
The heaviest smartphone data users are within the typical Generation Y bracket of aged 25--34, and use on average 580MB of data per month, according to analytics firm Neilsen.
Still, at least on the bright side, we have a major company buckling under pressure from its customers. It's not often you see a well-established, non-startup company actively respond to requests from its user base.
Whether or not you think it's fair, AT&T has at least --- at last --- been transparent about its opaque and hazy data caps. It's far from an "unlimited" service to what the public would expect, but it's a lot of space to manoeuvre. And that's coming from someone who just spent $215 in seven days on data costs while roaming abroad.
Image source: Josh Lowensohn/CNET.
Related:
- AT&T data throttling and the great customer ripoff
- AT&T's Q4: 7.6 million iPhones activated, 9.4 million smartphones sold
- AT&T vs. Verizon Wireless: How tiered plans will shake out
- CNET: Throttled iPhone user takes AT&T to court, wins $850
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Be real AT&T!
Capping speeds is a necessity
Capacity is not free. AT&T and Verizon and their smaller competitors have spent $billions to put infrastructure in place and will need to spend $billions more to meet growing demand. If you think that they are so profitable, just buy their shares and watch them soar. Oops, shouldn't give bad investment advice.
AT&T will have to find a way to correct their original pricing error and move to a staggered pay for usage model. In the mean time, limiting speeds of excessively high users in order to protect the access vast majority of normal users makes perfect sense.
Yes
So anyone that signs a bad contact can just tear it up?
The wireless companies should have known better, but they were in such a rush to sign up customers, they didn't care. Now they want to break their own contracts, and we are supposed to agree that that is a good way to run a business? I do not. They wouldn't tolerate customers throttling their payments, now would they?
If your mortgage company signs you up at only 1% interest, then 2 years later they aren't making enough money, should they be allowed to tear up your mortgage and make you pay higher rates? Sure, you could go to another bank, but you shouldn't have to because you had a contract. Sure, you can switch to another phone company, but you shouldn't have to because you have a contract.
(And who would you switch to? All the other phone companies did the same thing, and are trying to breach their contracts as well.)
FTC Should Step In
Agreed.
Hate to say this, but . . .
I'm fine with throttling - in fact, I think that some sort of bandwidth shaping is likely to be the best way to go about handling all of the traffic.
That being said - the bandwidth should just be shaped, period. Forget all of the monthly junk, just shape the bandwidth on a continuous basis. Give me a flat fee, and throttle me during peak usage, not at the end of the month.
Mostly agree
I'm waiting for the day a logical savior carrier rises in this country with actual data capability limitations in place, freeing us from these stagnated and often backward moving changes. "The Cloud" keeps us online more and more these days, accessing, updating and streaming our content to our many devices. These limitations aren't helping this movement.
I think for a month of "umlimited" service, with cloud apps, music and video streaming, and podcatching, 10 GBs of 4G LTE before throttling is a fine a break point. 5GB is still a bit too low.
AT&T, stop giving us reasons to complain about you, you're losing the war.
Kinda missing the point in the last part . . .
Agreed - it's not just apps I use specifically for accessing the internet, it's the increasing number of apps using data in the background. Push email, Dropbox and other sync apps, push notifications, etc. Even when I'm not doing much of anything at all, my phone is still actively using data.
"I think for a month of 'umlimited' service, with cloud apps, music and video streaming, and podcatching, 10 GBs of 4G LTE before throttling is a fine a break point. 5GB is still a bit too low. "
I think you missed my point, sigh.
Cell phone towers aren't hard drives. They don't store data as MB or GB. That's pretty much an artificial thing created by the cell phone companies. There really is no need at all to meter bandwidth in this highly artificial manner.
They're much more like broadband connections - the real measurement should be available bandwidth, not amount of data. It should be measured in MB/s, not GB/month!
What they can do instead is to throttle the maximum bandwidth at peak times. That would effectively solve the problem of major abusers, and it's basically what cable companies already do. I really don't see why we need to stick to this highly artificial method of using monthly data caps.
Didn't miss the point
I didn't miss the point, I just didn't agree on your stance there, hence my "Mostly Agree" subject. I don't think shaping all traffic is the answer. Even as an IT Manager tasked with managing this at my own business I hate the concept of someone deciding for everyone what is and is not important, it just doesn't work.
Also the idea of limiting by data usage, and not bandwidth is a real, proper method. It allows for overselling of bandwidth in a controlled manner. Otherwise you'd only be allocated 0.01 KBps given the number of people that would require a slice of the bandwidth at any given location. It's much more useful to limit the time the user is allowed to pull from the tower over the month, but since you can't control how saturated a tower's pipe will be (if it's running slow and screwing the user on amount of data accessed), the best method is data transferred over the month.
Again, I don't like limitations and I'm willing to pay to not have them. I just wished they offered a plan that had truly unthrottled, unlimited usage.
Disagree
Totally false. Bandwidth shaping does not mean you divide it up 100% evenly, it means you control it on the fly. Most people will barely use the bandwidth at all, and you can certainly give the remaining bandwidth to those who demand it more.
The current system absolutely does not help the problem. If I were to stream video, I'm using that bandwidth NOW, and all of the other customers are affected NOW. The radio signal doesn't meter the usage in some magical fashion. It's just electromagnetic waves.
"Also the idea of limiting by data usage, and not bandwidth is a real, proper method."
No, it isn't. There's nothing proper or real about it. Radio waves aren't monthly things - they're always there. The whole idea of metering is is EXTREMELY artificial and made up. In no way, shape, or form does it actually reflect how radio works.
AT&T: Customer Goodwill
AT&T is able to figure a way out of this dilemma. Over-promising and under-delivering is probably not a reputation they want to foster. Craig Herberg
Customer Goodwill
Agreed
A shame people who terminate the contract early have to pay because AT&T can't be bothered to put out a good service, but that's the system - nickel and dime the "customers"...
AT&T sucks.
:)
For 3G customers it throttles at 3GB?
For you people who keep -1 posts that call AT&T greedy, that say that AT&T is not unlimited, that AT&T needs to be sued over this I want to know why. Why do you feel that AT&T is in the right here and why are you afraid to speak out over it?
From Dictionary.com the definition of the word "unlimited":
[i]un??lim??it??ed??? ???[uhn-lim-i-tid] Show IPA
adjective
1.
not limited; unrestricted; unconfined: unlimited trade.
2.
boundless; infinite; vast: the unlimited skies.
3.
without any qualification or exception; unconditional.[/i]
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/unlimited
So if the plan is unlimited as AT&T claims it was when it was purchased then WHY are there limits on the speed?
unlimited was NEVER available
All of the "unlimited" plans from ALL carriers should therefore be immediately converted to x GB at y speeds and use of the word unlimited should be disallowed from ALL advertising, since nothing is truly unlimited except human stupidity. All customers currently enrolled in "unlimited" plans should be given the option to drop the plan without early termination fees (beyond paying for actual cost of the subsidized phone, or turning in the phone for credit).
Oh yeah, the carriers would love that...
It is ONLY 5%
Still concerned
Then we find that includes all cell phones, not just smartphones
Then its 5% in a users area with warnings based on projected usage
Then its throttling at approx 2gb with speeds so slow nothing loads
And now this.
Be nice if AT&T could sent out an alert when the network is reaching critical congestion and to Cobras point, throttle during that period in that location.