EFF: T-Mobile "Binge On" Is Just Throttling of All Data (eff.org) 227
onedobb writes: Tests confirm that when Binge On is enabled, T-Mobile throttles all HTML5 video streams to around 1.5Mps, even when the phone is capable of downloading at higher speeds, and regardless of whether or not the video provider enrolled in Binge On. This is the case whether the video is being streamed or being downloaded—which means that T-Mobile is artificially reducing the download speeds of customers with Binge On enabled, even if they're downloading the video to watch later. It also means that videos are being throttled even if they're being watched or downloaded to another device via a tethered connection.
who saw this coming (Score:2)
I just assume the other providers are either already doing the same thing or asking R & D to get on it.
"Whaa-aat? We can throttle the data?!
But.. that's exactly what they SAID it does. (Score:5, Informative)
I don't get the complaint.
Binge On specifically says that certain providers don't count against your data cap at all, and others will be processed to use less data.
Quoted from http://www.t-mobile.com/offer/... [t-mobile.com] :
So what's the headline here? 'Telco provides exactly the service they claim to provide'?
If they were downgrading video when Binge On was turned OFF, then THAT would be news.
Re:But.. that's exactly what they SAID it does. (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, to begin with, can you please advise what "optimization" is taking place?
Stating that the stream is "optimized for mobile" implies something more than just rate-limiting the video stream.
Oops. I'm sorry, they meant "optimized for T-Mobile" not "optimized for the customer."
One man's optimization is another man's Throttling (Score:4, Insightful)
Just let TMO explain that they're optimizing shareholder value. I think that's the expression.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, to begin with, can you please advise what "optimization" is taking place?
Stating that the stream is "optimized for mobile" implies something more than just rate-limiting the video stream.
Oops. I'm sorry, they meant "optimized for T-Mobile" not "optimized for the customer."
It, like most advertising, means absolutely nothing, at least in a technical sense. They say you get 3x the video so in that context optimized for mobile simple means reducing the amount streamed by 1/3 "optimizes" the video for mobile. The result may be poor if the video provider does not adjust for the drop in throughput; but T-mobile doesn't consider that their problem to fix; so in the end they are "optimizing" it even if what they are doing isn't necessarily what the customer may think it means. My gue
Re: (Score:3)
My guess is one reason to do that is to avoid having customers go over their monthly cap and pay extra
No, T-Mobile solved that by making all of their data plans unlimited 2g (except for the unlimited 4g LTE plan) with an allotment of 4g LTE service.
Agree. Marketing speak is the problem. (Score:5, Interesting)
I work in marketing and advertising by turns these days (seems like every career trajectory eventually ends up somewhere in this playground, whether near top or bottom of the food chain), so I have to admit guilt here as well.
There is a tendency to operate with the goal of eliminating negative and limiting language because, surprise surprise, positive language tests out well in actual conversion numbers. But there is unquestionably an element of half-truth in it.
"slowed down and degraded to reduce data use" becomes "optimized for mobile"
"we've raised our prices" becomes "we've changed our plans to offer the best possible value to our customers"
"we've removed a bunch of features that raised costs for us" becomes "we've streamlined our service for ease of use"
"we've slashed our support staff" becomes "we're enabling you to find answers more quickly with our self-help area"
"we've eliminated our warranty" becomes "our product is so reliable that it's made warranties obsolete"
and so on.
It's not the actual policy that's the problem. It's that language is Orwellian. Bad becomes good. "Optimization" is supposed to be a good thing. But in this case, the customer's presumption that "optimized" equals "good for me" is actually not true; the word is being used in opposition to its conventional connotation.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:But.. that's exactly what they SAID it does. (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, to begin with, can you please advise what "optimization" is taking place?
Video streamed to your cell phone is encoded to a bitrate for cell phone screens, which is usually around 700-1200kbit/s. T-Mobile throttles to 1500kbit/s, preventing excessive buffering (i.e. keeping your phone from downloading 8 minutes of a 10 minute video in the first few seconds), reducing total transfer (when people stop watching a video halfway through, they're only buffered up to maybe 30 seconds past that) and instantaneous bandwidth usage (100 people jumping onto Youtube all at once aren't suddenly using 9 gigs/sec).
In other words: You only need ~1.5Mbit/s to stream video to your cell phone, so they decrease network congestion and total transfer costs by throttling the bandwidth for video streams to 1.5Mbit/s. This allows the quality of the streaming service to remain as expected (bandwidth is higher than streaming video bitrate) and enforces predictable network utilization by this particular application, thus allowing more reliable cost projections and decreasing the risk of cost overages, which allows T-Mobile to provide the service at a lower price (in this case, bluntly unlimited video streaming, because the cost of the average number of streaming users times 1.5Mbit/s is less than the service cost of providing unlimited video streaming, and there will be zero overages from this group of users).
They could provide full-speed, unlimited video streaming. They'd have to A) charge more; or B) wait for infrastructure build-outs, then not increase their network speed (just throttle *everything*). In other words: they'd have to match the price of the service to the cost of the service.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, they said all that is to know in that quote: You have to spend 3 times the time to watch a single episode of whatever because downloading takes longer.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The thing with buffering is that... well... it's not 1999 anymore. Buffering is a massive step backwards and, in the here and now, is a sign of a severely deficient network, a very poorly run video service, or an incompetently written app.
I suppose your next bit of advice will be to go back to using Real Player again?
Re: (Score:2)
Buffering is a massive step backwards
Buffering is here to stay. Always has been. The length of time it takes to buffer is what's diminished greatly. What used to be 15-30 seconds of buffering and pauses in the middle on under-runs is now 2-3 seconds of buffering and adaptive streaming to prevent under-runs. But there's still buffering going on. A real-time bit stream would have terrible jitter and dropouts - even on a 300Mbps connection.
Re: (Score:2)
With over 1MB of download, that's either a panoramic vista of porn or a waste of bandwidth that could have been a JPEG.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that in this case T-Mobile is doing something that the streaming providers should just be doing in the first place. My kids all have iPod touches. Youtube will use a ridiculous amount of bandwidth if you let it. I limited the devices to 1 Mbit on the home network and they haven't complained of any problems. They are actually able to watch more videos while at the same time using less of the limited resource. There's almost no reason to use a high quality stream on a device with a 4 inch screen.
Re: (Score:3)
I limited the devices to 1 Mbit on the home network and they haven't complained of any problems. They are actually able to watch more videos while at the same time using less of the limited resource.
So you have a data cap on your home internet connection? That sucks.
There's almost no reason to use a high quality stream on a device with a 4 inch screen.
You typically hold a 4 inch screen pretty close, so you actually do need high quality streams.
That said, kids don't seem to care that much about HD. They'll happily watch cartoons on youtube that appear to be from a 30 year old VHS tape ripped with the highest compression settings available, to the point where you can't make out features on characters' faces.
Personally I can't stand it. Perhaps it reminds me too much of the few years I went
Re: (Score:2)
There's almost no reason to use a high quality stream on a device with a 4 inch screen
If you're looking at a 300+ppi screen (nearly 720p) from only a few inches away, I'd say there's still some good reason. 1Mbps is still on the higher end of quality with H.264, though.
Re: (Score:2)
If all they're doing is providing a 1.5mb pipe, then why do they need to be the gatekeeper of what sites can use it?
Re: (Score:2)
Just my .02: My big complaint is that Binge On is all-or-nothing, where I would want at least per-app, but ideally per-video, granularity, which T-Mobile seems disinclined to offer. Instead, they seem to want to turn it on for everyone and count on everyone being lazy enough to leave it on.
For example: 480p may be fine, especially given the screen size, for fooling around on YouTube on my phone. But if I'm watching a movie on Netflix... maybe even streaming it to a full-sized TV via ChromeCast... I want
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have noticed that since "Binge On" has been enabled, I've been unable to watch "non-Binge" video from other sources.
If I try to watch 1080p Video, (knowing full well that it will count against my data), the video stutters, freezes, pauses, etc.
This article is suggesting that because I have "Binge On" for apps like HBOGo, I've lost the ability to effectively watch any HD video.
THAT is the complaint and the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
More details from the article:
If the video is more than 480p and the server sending the video doesn’t have a way to reduce or adapt the bitrate of the video as it’s being streamed, the result is stuttering and uneven streaming—exactly the opposite of the experience T-Mobile claims their “optimization” will have.
Given the difference between what T-Mobile implies they do and what we found, we contacted them to get clarification. They confirmed that they don’t do any actual optimization of video streams other than reducing the bandwidth allocated to them (and relying on the provider to notice, and adapt the bitrate accordingly).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think you have to pay to become a Binge On provider, just allow your stream to be subject to T-Mobiles proprietary video shaping software. If you want your service to only be viewable under your conditions don't join, if you're willing to let T-Mobile alter bitrates and such you can sign up and become part of the service.
It's like their music service where people could even register their own home PCs as a music provider so they could stream unlimited music from their home machine to their phones.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No you don't pay for Binge On, but I bet that T-Mobile gets a kickback from HBO, Netflix, Hulu for those better speeds. And this is exactly what a violation of net neutrality is. Now the "little guy" who wants to have a streaming service gets kicked to the bottom rung because they didn't pay for premium delivery by T-Mobile.
I bet you're wrong. Wonder who wins. I bet I win :)
See how "betting" on shit you don't know works?
Re: (Score:2)
No you don't pay for Binge On, but I bet that T-Mobile gets a kickback from HBO, Netflix, Hulu for those better speeds.
um, what? HBO, Netflix et al. pay T-Mobile to have their content quality degraded?
it's pretty simple. video is by far the largest source of congestion on the internet. letting people stream longer at capped speeds is a net win. not only that, it's marketed as a feature. a feature that ends up de-congesting their networks.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want your service to only be viewable under your conditions don't join, if you're willing to let T-Mobile alter bitrates and such you can sign up and become part of the service.
except they throttle ALL video transmission, even that of non-Binge On(tm) providers. they throttle it, but it still counts against your cap. that's why Youtube is up in arms.
oh, and the throttling extends to providers whose service doesn't support downgraded video. so if the stream is 1080p and can't be downgraded, you'll get excessive buffering / stuttering in playback.
Benefits (Score:2)
It is better for everyone else if video download speed is limited to what is making sense. Let's just hope that they introduced transfer speed control to make sure that everyone gets enough data to watch the videos. People not getting more than they need is just added since it comes for free and helps others.
Downloads that don't count against your limit (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're getting free downloads, and you are upset that they are slow? Turn it off, get them fast and use up your data allotment.
They are throttling even the providers that you still get charged for.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Unwatchable"? Plex calls 1.5Mps 480p/DVD quality. Pretty good on a 5" screen.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just the "free downloads". T-Mobile is throttling Youtube, which is not included in the "Binge-on" plan.
Net neutrality (Score:2)
They can't favour different providers with their throttling, so they need to do it indiscriminately.
Re:First world problems... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The majority of Americans believe that Satan is a living, breathing beaing who walks around the place, so... this is way down the list of priorities.
Re:First world problems... (Score:4, Funny)
The majority of Americans believe that Satan is a living, breathing beaing who walks around the place, so... this is way down the list of priorities.
Wait...are you saying Mark Zuckerberg isn't real?
Re: (Score:2)
You really shouldn't speak for the majority of any group of people when you have no idea of what you speak of.
Netflix looks and sounds fine... (Score:5, Interesting)
... And it costs me nothing to stream it to my phone. I don't care how they do it. It works great.
Move on to the next 'outrage'.
Re: Netflix looks and sounds fine... (Score:3)
I hit play, the video buffers for a few seconds, and plays all the way through without a hitch. The experience is indistinguishable from my wired connection at home.
Re:First world problems... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:First world problems... (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't recall anyone asking for anything for free.
A big part of the problem here is that many don't offer unlimited data at ANY price, and when you do find someone that does, they often try to bog it down with fine print like this or just flat out cut you off if you use too much of your "unlimited" service.
Now, people don't expect truly "UNLIMITED" data. They can oversell just fine, but the problem is that they're overselling with the thought that a user should only use 0.05% of the actual stated bandwidth that they COULD use. Anyone that dares go above that is "cheating" and abusing the system.
10-15 years ago they could kinda sorta get away with that, but now streaming content is everywhere. People who don't know what bandwidth even is can consume huge chunks of it - completely legally - with Youtube, Hulu, Netflix, Twitch, Sling, Spotify, Pandora, etc.
The telecom companies 10-15 years ago should have realized that those "excessive" users from that era were the future norm and built out their network accordingly. Don't stamp your feet and demand that progress stop.
Re:First world problems... (Score:5, Informative)
No matter how you twist it, "unlimited" means unlimited.
If they're not offering a truely unlimited service, they shouldn't be labelling it "unlimited".
The fact that people have come to expect companies lying to them, doesn't make it right.
Re:First world problems... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, because there's also things like data rate caps.
In the landline world, ISPs sell multiple tiers of connection speed. If you want a faster connection you pay more money. Simple.
In the mobile world, this never really caught on, and instead they charge based on link utilization. This results in a metric that makes no sense for customers - most apps don't give an adequate explanation of how much data they use on average and I'm sure, with all the the million analytics suites they apparently need, that they don't want to or outright cannot provide accurate data usage figures for their software. Network speed is comparatively easy to understand, measure, and analyze.
T-Mobile appears to be trying to hack speed tiers back into the mobile pricing model by giving customers the option to reduce bandwidth in favor of it not counting against their link utilization.. which would be fine except for the fact that they will only discount certain video services despite this technology working on all of them for as long as you have it enabled. This appears to be a blatant net neutrality violation, then - the technology clearly works everywhere, why not just let us use it on any qualifying video streaming service?!
Re: (Score:2)
If my connection is throttled to 1.5Mb/s because I purchased a "1.5Mb/s Internet!" plan, all well and good. This, however, is a 'zOMG 4G LTE xTreme!'(except for applications you actually want ample bandwidth for; but totally crazy fast for anything you hypothetically might do but d
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Thus the word has come to take a meaning closer to "not limited per user" or something like that. They shouldn't place user limits on "unlimited" but are free to oversubscribe so that not everyone could get 100% all the time. Done right, anyone who tries will get 100% of their service whenever they try.
Re: (Score:3)
The thing is, at least to me, that there are two different aspects of a net connection that 'unlimited' can target.
One is speed. Obviously physics prevent such a thing as an unlimited speed, but it could be taken to mean that no matter how much you're trying to download, it will come through as fast as the server on the other end is pushing it.
The second is total data transfer. Download 100 GB in a month? Fine, do so with nothing extra appearing on your bill or your speed dropping from overuse. 200 GB? 15 T
Re: (Score:2)
But that would be sensible, easy, and honest.
It will never happen.
Re:First world problems... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's actually impossible to offer unlimited data. This would require infinite bandwidth.
A restaurant can offer "all-you-can-eat", but they probably can't offer "unlimited food", because food is a limited resource.
As far as I can tell, "unlimited data" in the world of cellular means that they will never cut your data off or charge you more money for going over a certain amount of data. There will always be a limit to your bandwidth whether artificial or from physics.
People just need to get used to the idea that datarate is as important a spec as gigabytes when getting a data plan.
It's easy to offer "unlimited" data plans if the data rate is low enough.
Re: (Score:2)
What crack are you smoking, and where does someone get some?
So if something has 0% trans fat (for example), it can legally contain trans fat (in U.S.A.)
No, 0% means 0%, not 0.1%.
Re: (Score:3)
What crack are you smoking, and where does someone get some?
So if something has 0% trans fat (for example), it can legally contain trans fat (in U.S.A.)
No, 0% means 0%, not 0.1%.
What crack are you smoking, and where does someone get some?
So if something has 0% trans fat (for example), it can legally contain trans fat (in U.S.A.)
No, 0% means 0%, not 0.1%.
Well, when it comes to nutrition labels, 0% means anything under 0.5%, because they can round off to the nearest percent: When the Nutrition Facts label says a food contains “0 g” of trans fat, but includes “partially hydrogenated oil” in the ingredient list, it means the food contains trans fat, but less than 0.5 grams of trans fat per serving. So, if you eat more than one serving, you could quickly reach your daily limit of trans fat. (American Heart Assoc. [heart.org])
Re: (Score:2)
Not really.
When you mean to say "more than we expect you to reasonably use", you say "more than we expect you to reasonably use".
If you're not in a situation where something is unlimited, practical or theoretical, you simply use a different word.
(As a side note, "more than we expect you to reasonably use" is subjective to the point of being useless).
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.t-mobile.com/cell-p... [t-mobile.com]
For $95 a month T-mobile offers an unlimited high speed data. All of their other plans offer limited high speed data that slows down after you reach the limit.
If you have an unlimited plan and choose to use Binge-On they
Re: (Score:2)
So this is unlimited to you?
Unlimited data even after all your high-speed 4G LTE data is used, at reduced speeds.
Unlimited would be "You can saturate your up- and download bandwidth at the agreed upon transfer rate 24x7x365".
Re:First world problems... (Score:5, Insightful)
Good grief. Any society depends on cooperation and sharing of resources. You can manufacture outrage that your "unlimited" plan is actually limited, and demand that your carrier provide you with your own dedicated cell tower everywhere, for the "agreed upon price" but that's bullshit. What's more you know that's bullshit.
Of all the carriers, TMobile is about the most generous with bandwidth per dollar, and most reasonable with its terms of use.
Seriously, there are greater abuses out there.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if you get LTE speeds all the time, you are still limited. You can argue that your hitting a technological, rather than a business, limitation, but it's still a limit.
Re: First world problems... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Unlimited would be "You can saturate your up- and download bandwidth at the agreed upon transfer rate 24x7x365".
Nobody has ever had that definition of "unlimited" for a consumer service. That you would like dedicated service for a consumer price doesn't change reality.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Unlimited 4G LTE customers who use more than 23 GB of data in a bill cycle will have their data usage de-prioritized compared to other customers for that bill cycle at locations and times when competing network demands occur, resulting in relatively slower speeds. See t-mobile.com/OpenInternet for details.
oops.
Re: (Score:2)
You see, when a pipe is only so big, only so much can fit through it. It would sure seem to make sense to let someone who hasn't had a chance at the tap yet get on in there and have a drink before someone who's had a few glasses already, no? That's not saying "no, you can't have more" or "you have to slow down", that's saying "let someone else have a go at it first" and that's certainly not limiting, it's just life. Unless you're an egotistical dick who thinks you shoul
Re: (Score:2)
Now, people don't expect truly "UNLIMITED" data.
I do. If you sell me unlimited data it had better be unlimited, not "Unlimited (tm)", In the same way I'd expect that if I purchased airfare from LAX to ATL, you wouldn't dump me off in DFW and call it squaresies. If you take 100% of my money, you had damn well better deliver 100% of what you sold me. If you didn't really mean unlimited, find someone with a more comprehensive vocabulary that can more accurately describe the product you're actually selling.
Re:First world problems... (Score:5, Insightful)
that many don't offer unlimited data at ANY price
Boohoo. Pay for what you use. Do you demand the power company give you unlimited electricity or the hydro company unlimited water? Bandwidth is a finite resource at any given time.
First off. I *DO* pay for what I use. On top of a plan for unlimited data, I'm paying special rates simply for having a smartphone that can actually USE that data. Moreover, the plan price just got jacked for ADDITIONAL money, as it's a grandfathered "unlimited" plan that's no longer sold. As such, the unlimited plan is significantly MORE expensive than a metered plan. Stuff like this throttling mean they're overselling and expecting people to use less than one percent of their total possible bandwidth. And anyone who uses more is "cheating". Regardless of how much they pay.
And your analogy is fucked up.
Sure, maybe I can't pull 1.21 jiggawatts, but I run a business out of my home and use roughly 2.5x the power consumed by my neighbors. At no point does the power company sit there and say "between times A and B we're going to limit your power consumption to only what your neighbors, who aren't home and thus not really using much power, consume during the day..."
Re: (Score:3)
But there have been instances where user consumption has been limited due to power supply constraints. Brownouts are an example. Load control devices another.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a production problem, not a delivery problem. With bandwidth, production is ENTIRELY the job of the other end of the connection. For cell companies, they have one job -- delivery. Comparing rate limitations to power limitations during brownouts is NOT apples to apples.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
that many don't offer unlimited data at ANY price
Boohoo. Pay for what you use. Do you demand the power company give you unlimited electricity or the hydro company unlimited water? Bandwidth is a finite resource at any given time.
This is like saying stop complaining about the electric company dropping a phase going into your building because you're using too much electricity.
Re: First world problems... (Score:3)
Except the content keeps streaming just fine... For as long as you want. It's unlimited streaming, not unlimited bandwidth.
Re: (Score:2)
Except the content keeps streaming just fine... For as long as you want. It's unlimited streaming, not unlimited bandwidth.
What good is unlimited streaming if the quality isn't that great? I've never used their service so I have no idea what it's like.
Re: First world problems... (Score:2)
The quality is good.. no stuttering, no pixellation. I guess if you're a cinephile you might find a problem with it, but then you probably wouldn't be watching on your phone.
Re: (Score:2)
I guess if you're a cinephile you might find a problem with it, but then you probably wouldn't be watching on your phone.
True
Re: (Score:3)
And I've had unmetered water and unmetered power. Note the other utilities never sell them as "unlimited" just "unmetered". And yes, they do sell them that way, in some places and circumstances.
Re: (Score:2)
Bandwidth is a finite resource at any given time.
Good point. Veery good point.
So, for the sake of the argument, assume it is also correct. Then, HOW ON EARTH can Telcos be selling effing UNLIMITED bandwidth?
Right. They can't. Exactly how the power company can't sell endless electricity. But do other utility companies advertide anything unlimited? No.
Boohoo. Pay for what you use. Do you demand the power company give you unlimited electricity or the hydro company unlimited water?
See, THAT's the difference.
Re: (Score:3)
Reduce your browsing? Turn off your phone, just like you turn off your appliances?
What you're saying is that your big expensive light shines in the corners of your house, and you don't use that light so you don't want to pay for it.
Re: (Score:2)
There is nothing stopping you from using an ad blocker. There are third party browsers for Android and iOS 9 supports Ad-blocking extensions natively.
Re: First world problems... (Score:2)
Somebody is being deliberately obtuse.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Waah. I want unlimited data for FREE!!!
Want! WANT!!! WANT!!!!!
That's completely unreasonable. I, on the other hand, simply want what I paid for and which the vendor agreed to deliver. Yes, if the actual agreement included dodge's like "...binge away..." with "...at a max of 1.5 Mbps..." in fine print buried 200 lines into the ToS, it's on me. The problem is that telecom is anything but a free market and I can't force any carrier to do anything with my actions. Therefore, regulation is in order.
Re: (Score:2)
Waah. I want unlimited data for FREE!!!
Want! WANT!!! WANT!!!!!
Maybe not free but when they advertise unlimited data and I pay for unlimited data. I want unlimited fucking data, or at least a high enough limit that unless I'm properly taking the piss I ain't gunna hit.
Re: (Score:3)
They advertise that. It costs $95/month and you get what you pay for.
(According to others, you CAN enable "binge on" with that plan, and you get "extra" stuff for doing so. Kind of like how Amazon gives Prime users movie rental credits if they choose "slowboat" shipping instead of the free 2-day)
Re: (Score:2)
Kind of like how Amazon gives Prime users movie rental credits if they choose "slowboat" shipping instead of the free 2-day
Thank you for informing me of this, I will have to take advantage of it. Most of my orders aren't a high priority to me, I could get lots of free rentals this way.
Re: (Score:2)
They advertise that. It costs $95/month and you get what you pay for.
not really.
Unlimited 4G LTE customers who use more than 23 GB of data in a bill cycle will have their data usage de-prioritized compared to other customers for that bill cycle at locations and times when competing network demands occur, resulting in relatively slower speeds. See t-mobile.com/OpenInternet for details.
Re: (Score:2)
If you sell it as such, I am expecting to get it as such. If you cannot provide it, don't sell it.
You would be fully justified in your outcry if they sold it as a limited data plan and the customer now unreasonably expects it to be unlimited.
Re: (Score:2)
So, there's this interesting phenomenon.
It's well known that big companies employ PR firms to go out and run damage control when negative news stories break (even if that damage control is just a bunch of people derailing the discussion by acting like complete asshats), but you can't actually accuse an individual of being a "shill" without someone calling you a conspiracy theorist. And in all fairness, there's probably a fair amount of crossover between corporate shills and people who really are just troll
Re: (Score:2)
Any throttling or data cap should be clearly specified.
How much "unlimited" data can you transfer if the speed is capped to, say 50 KB/s? For sure you could still browse most websites with this kind of plan, but this is not what you signed up for.
50 KB/s sounds ridiculous? How about 100 KB/s? What is an acceptable limit? The answer is: any, as long as it is clearly stipulated in the contract.
Re: (Score:2)
It's pretty clearly specified that if you enable Binge On with your account, your data gets throttled.
The only hole seems to be that there are certain cases where having Binge On enabled results in a throttle but not "free" data from the sounds of it.
I have zero problems with this since you, as a user, CAN TURN IT OFF. (TFA indicates that the issue is users who have Binge On enabled causes throttling in cases of providers not part of Binge On.)
Re: (Score:2)
Speed, and variance in speed (Score:2)
It's not just the "unlimited" portion of the data that is slow though -- stuff that is subject to your monthly cap is also being throttled. Grow up and try reading TFA for a change, or at least TFS.
I did read TFA.
Look at the bar graph. Streaming a video, downloading a video file to the SD card, and downloading a video file with the headers changed to say it was not a video file were all throttled, and all got speed of 1.5Mbps. Downloading a large non-video file for comparison had a speed of 4.2 Mbps.
That 4.2 is slightly lower than the 5.5 achieved without "binge on" feature enabled... but if you look at the error bars, the difference doesn't indicate throttling; it's just normal variance (i.e., withi
Re: First world problems... (Score:2)
Grow up? What are you, 12?
Re: (Score:2)
It is better for everyone else if video download speed is limited to what is making sense. Let's just hope that they introduced transfer speed control to make sure that everyone gets enough data to watch the videos. People not getting more than they need is just added since it comes for free and helps others.
Re: (Score:2)
if it's customary for mobile networks to throttle any sort of unlimited usage of their network, there clearly is something behind that.
except... in this case they're not just throttling the "unlimited" part of the data, they're also throttling data that is subject to bandwidth caps -- paid for data -- and in the process, making it often unusable.
Re: (Score:3)
But then you'd be as well not signing up for the binge on service. If you run your traffic through a VPN then all the benefits of binge on (Netflix streaming that doesn't count against your data usage) will vanish.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem that the article illustrates is that once you use BingeOn to watch your HBO shows, your data is throttled to 1.5Mbps for EVERYTHING.
You may want to watch a 1080P movie from a non-BingeOn source (understanding that it will count against your data limits), but the movie is just unwatchable at 1.5Mbps. It will glitch/freeze/stutter, audio drops, etc.
With BingeOn, I signed up for zero-rating of appropriate providers, and 4G LTE bandwidth and speed of all other providers.
Now it turns out I cannot wa
Re: (Score:2)
I absolutely, positively, 100% agree with people that it should be both OPT IN and bett
Re: (Score:2)