Originally Posted by con247

I'm glad it's gone. People who use over 10gb/month should not be paying $30.

I think if you had the unlimited data plan you wouldn't be saying this.

Originally Posted by tekhna

We know your opinion, and frankly it's Verizon's problem, not mine. If they have a problem with me watching an hour of Netflix a day at the gym, they shouldn't have sold me a phone with unlimited data, and sold me on mobile Netflix.
You're right, I don't need to. But I can, so I do. I don't know why you should be glad people are losing something they enjoy. That's childish and small.

^

Originally Posted by con247

Flat rate $5/GB with a 5GB a month minimum is the way to do it. So a smartphone will still cost $25/month if you use 0mb-5GB. Then $5/GB after that.

Things like Netflix and pandora are what are causing bandwidth problems and everyday use of these needs to stop. Of you have a long car ride one in a blue moon that you need that stuff for 5-10 hours no problem. But if you stream pandora every day that is bs. Buy your music and support the artist.

Yet HD Netflix was promoted as a selling point on the RAZR trololol.

Originally Posted by tonictonic

Assuming Verizon isn't lying, the way they deal with congestion is the smart way to do it. Low users have higher packet priority over data hogs. This works well for low data users as the data hogs will essentially be "invisible" to them, and data hogs at worst will deal with wonky data rates during the day, but not be forcefully throttled so at the very least they can enjoy much faster speeds during off-peak hours.

So if the data management system can consistently keep data hogs last in line for their bandwidth, they are not the ones that are straining the system. It's simply the sheer number of "light users" hitting one tower at any given moment. So if your friend already owns a smartphone, how much data he uses doesn't matter, it's the fact that he just simply owns a smartphone is the real problem.

One cursory glance at what Verizon is doing, in how they actually implement caps and overages, the whole idea that managing shared data is even practical, and the intense push of services that further burden their LTE such as LTE broadbrand for the home, just goes to show that the data crisis is just a manufactured excuse to have ridiculous prices on a much desired service in a market that barely has real competition.

Well said.

Originally Posted by cstrife999

Why? What's the point of 4g LTE with that logic? dude don't buy into the hype that massive data users have anything to do with this situation... Ignorance...

---------- Post added at 09:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:04 PM ----------



I disagree completely... Some people don't have access to good home internet but do have 4g lte. There is no bandwidth issue on 4g don't buy into their crap. Seriously everyone needs to stop being ignorant and just realize this is greed...

Umm, then why are they trying to put wifi through all urban areas to offload mobile data? I think its more real than you realize.

Originally Posted by ijustwantmydock

And that is why I'm going to t-mobile

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2

have fun with that. Got practically no signal at work. Had to stand by the window.

Originally Posted by fenguepay

1. Keep using 1.5 gigs a day.
2. Wait till contract is over.
3. Switch to Sprint LTE.
4. ???
5. Profit!
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda premium

3 months later you get a letter from sprint stating they we terminating your service for abusing their network.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

Originally Posted by fenguepay

1. Keep using 1.5 gigs a day.
2. Wait till contract is over.
3. Switch to Sprint LTE.
4. ???
5. Profit!
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda premium

Who says that Sprint's LTE is fast?
It isn't even available yet.

Originally Posted by GrayTheWolf

Who says that Sprint's LTE is fast?
It isn't even available yet.

Testing on empty networks has shown speeds below verizon and at&t. Wonder how it will work when congested.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

Originally Posted by nrfitchett4

Testing on empty networks has shown speeds below verizon and at&t. Wonder how it will work when congested.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

I don't even want to think about those speeds.

Originally Posted by a.mcdear

I think I might hate you for saying that... Even though I have unlimited data and never come close to even 4GB/mo, what you're saying is basically total blasphemy in my eyes.

YouTube streams fine at .8 mbps with data speeds over 17mbps and lack of traffic that heavy by all users at once. And considering the many bands and backhaul capability. the need for capping is axiomaticly artificial.

See my thread for more documented proof and system specs.

I am also sorry to tell you the unlimited brothers did not die of natural causes. They were murdered one by one. Companies like AT&T-Verizon, and Comcast murdered them and pumped money and propaganda into governments who falsely think they own the internet to legalize their crimes.

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1677490

Now to figure out how to thank myself.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

Originally Posted by GrayTheWolf

And get extremely slow download speeds.

I am sure that by the time my contract with verizon ends, sprint will have picked up a great deal of verizon customers, reinvested in their infrastructure, and become a more reliable service provider. They have LTE coverage in my area already, and its faster than verizon. At least in my area. On verizon in my house I only get 3.5 Mbps down. 90 or so k up


edit. I just looked at the coverage map and although LTE is apparently installed, It is not showing. It must still be in testing. Also I am presuming that it will be faster than 3.5 mbps and have not actually tested it.