Jump to content

Verizon and AT&T’s data caps have made LTE a waste of money


kckid
 Share

Recommended Posts

Aww, poor baby, he's realizing that mobile data is by its very nature, an expensive, shared resource, and not an unlimited fountain of streaming... streams.

 

Sure, I'll completely agree that VZW's pricing and plans are exorbitant, but much like WiMAX before it, I honestly think that LTE was oversold on its capabilities and capacity. The author says " LTE was supposed to lead to a golden age of mobile broadband where people could quickly watch videos on their smartphones and tablets", and I don't think it ever really was. In both theory and practice, that is what brings networks to its knees, 4G or no.

 

Now, if somebody was to throw 120 MHz worth of TD-LTE at it instead of 10x10 of FD-LTE, then maybe...

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aww, poor baby, he's realizing that mobile data is by its very nature, an expensive, shared resource, and not an unlimited fountain of streaming... streams.

 

Sure, I'll completely agree that VZW's pricing and plans are exorbitant, but much like WiMAX before it, I honestly think that LTE was oversold on its capabilities and capacity. The author says " LTE was supposed to lead to a golden age of mobile broadband where people could quickly watch videos on their smartphones and tablets", and I don't think it ever really was. In both theory and practice, that is what brings networks to its knees, 4G or no.

 

Now, if somebody was to throw 120 MHz worth of TD-LTE at it instead of 10x10 of FD-LTE, then maybe...

Yup, I thought the same thing, Data caps are actually a good thing for the network but the prices for those data caps is way too high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

caps are never a good thing.

 

And he is right on the money, verizon/att are making it so customers are paying them to avoid using the network that they are paying to use in the first place.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That might explain why VZW was interested in EBS spectrum. Sounds to me like the Lady In Red is a little worried she may be oversold. See HowardForums speed test thread. I can testify that in my town, VZW LTE is already slowing up and they've only had it here for 3 months. Great work, Lady In Red. :lol:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That might explain why VZW was interested in EBS spectrum. Sounds to me like the Lady In Red is a little worried she may be oversold. See HowardForums speed test thread. I can testify that in my town, VZW LTE is already slowing up and they've only had it here for 3 months. Great work, Lady In Red. :lol:

 

VZW is actually Kelly LeBrock?  I knew it!

 

 

AJ

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your a half mile from the tower.

Very true ha. The range on 2.5GHz frequencies is pretty limited, I noticed this on WiMax in the Boise/SLC areas. But 800/1900/2500 will be a great trifecta once its completed. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your a half mile from the tower.And that's a maybe hell there lte on 1900 might make it a mile or two at best. For that fact Verison's LTE on 700 is only good for about 3.5 mile's max.

All of the above are inaccurate. Please do not make these kinds of statements. Others may read them, accept them as definitive facts, and repeat them. This is how misinformation gets started.

 

AJ

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Truth hurt's. Only way it get better is if terrain is flat and no tree's and you can see the tower with your own eye's. This goes for all wireless tech and all carrier's...

Yes, it does. It will really hurt when AJ comes back shows you that you are incorrect.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Truth hurt's. Only way it get better is if terrain is flat and no tree's and you can see the tower with your own eye's. This goes for all wireless tech and all carrier's...

 

Yes, the truth hurts.  If you continue to post these kinds of excessive generalizations, they will be removed because distortions hurt, too.

 

AJ 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the mobile side where everyone has to share the bandwidth, caps are a good thing.

 

I don't think caps are the best way to handle excessive bandwidth usage. I would prefer throttling instead.

 

Also, it's not how much you use, but when you use it.

A customer using 100GB/month off-peak is not negatively affecting other users.

But even with 1GB caps, a network can be brought to its knees if everyone decides to watch the latest cute cat video at the same time.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think caps are the best way to handle excessive bandwidth usage. I would prefer throttling instead.

 

Also, it's not how much you use, but when you use it.

A customer using 100GB/month off-peak is not negatively affecting other users.

But even with 1GB caps, a network can be brought to its knees if everyone decides to watch the latest cute cat video at the same time.

I kind of lump caps and throttling in the same category. Like I think T-Mobile's 5GB cap is one where after you go over you get EDGE like speeds. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the truth hurts.  If you continue to post these kinds of excessive generalizations, they will be removed because distortions hurt, too.

 

AJ 

You know what else hurts, AJ?  MY EYES when I'm forced to read poorly constructed pseudo-sentences strewn with typos and other glaring grammatical errors.  It only supplements the pain of the misinformation contained therein.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a

 

You know what else hurts, AJ?  MY EYES when I'm forced to read poorly constructed pseudo-sentences strewn with typos and other glaring grammatical errors.  It only supplements the pain of the misinformation contained therein.  

For a mentally challenged person I think my poorly constructed pseudo-sentences strewn wiht and other glaring grammatical errors anit that bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this were a sponsor area, i'd post proof, but I know a spot just up the road from me that has a -103 LTE signal, and that spot is 8 miles from the tower. Actually, 8.9 miles, but that's driving distance. As the crow flies...6..probably...

I'm wondering if maps has a way of showing ATCF distances...but either way, 3 miles? no way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this were a sponsor area, i'd post proof, but I know a spot just up the road from me that has a -103 LTE signal, and that spot is 8 miles from the tower. Actually, 8.9 miles, but that's driving distance. As the crow flies...6..probably...

I'm wondering if maps has a way of showing ATCF distances...but either way, 3 miles? no way.

There is/are exceptions but that is not normal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is/are exceptions but that is not normal.

Is there a 'normal' per se? I thought they adjusted the antennas depending on the area and population...

My wife, at the plant, is getting LTE signal in "higher" places (up in the control room, further up the elevation than normal)...and I bet she's probably 10 miles or more from the nearest LTE tower. Sensorly shows her "dot" on the mapping she tried to do, but when she left the control room, she lost it. And looking at the closest tower that has been completed, I can't decide which one she's getting that LTE from. They are both pretty far away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a 'normal' per se? I thought they adjusted the antennas depending on the area and population...

 

Correct, there is no normal.  RF planning always involves tradeoffs -- capacity, coverage, interference -- that vary from site to site.  And this is why generalizations about usable cell radii are not helpful.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct, there is no normal. RF planning always involves tradeoffs -- capacity, coverage, interference -- that vary from site to site. And this is why generalizations about usable cell radii are not helpful.

 

AJ

Not sure I would use the word planning on some of them ;) expensive fiber connections to cover those cane fields with almost zero population and the LTE doesn't reach the interstate as intended isn't planning to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is/are exceptions but that is not normal.

Since you are a sponsor and have access to the maps, I suggest you locate your towers and then start to drive away from them and see what the distance is between them. I've gone upwards of 5 miles from a PCS tower while still retaining a signal. There is no way you can generalize most or all towers being effective to x miles distance. There are so many factors involved...down tilt, interference, device rf performance, weather, topography, phone case design, hand holding (iPhone had an issue with this), solar flares, alien intervention, nuclear fallout, zombie apocalypse, etc...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the mobile side where everyone has to share the bandwidth, caps are a good thing.

actually no they aren't.  If you want to manage how much folks use..slow them down.  t-mobile has that option available.  If you cannot support folks using 10 mb/s all the time then give everyone 1 megabit.  Also it is the wireless carriers own fault for marketing 4g as a replacement for wired.  What they need to do is properly manage their networks..caps only drive up revenues they don't do anything for network management.  SPrint's model is the new myway plans is more correct...reserve the right to throttle heavy usage(video..etc etc) to 1 mb/s or less rather than using arbitrary caps.  Also ALL connections are shared..it is just a matter of where the sharing takes place.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Here is how many competitive permits are "remaining" in each state after round 27: (bonus points: reply with the states/territories/districts that are already "settled".) AL 4 AR 1 AS 2 AZ 5 CA 2 CO 53 DE 2 FL 5 GA 48 GU 3 HI 3 IA 40 ID 19 IL 7 IN 19 KS 113 KY 22 LA 9 MA 3 MD 11 ME 1 MI 48 MO 54 MP 10 MS 27 MT 33 NC 12 ND 22 NE 8 NH 1 NJ 2 NM 26 NV 17 NY 6 OH 24 OK 9 OR 2 PA 2 PR 1 SC 12 SD 47 TN 17 TX 36 UT 23 VA 8 WA 22 WI 22 WV 2 WY 11
    • Almost 89% and $250 Million after round 27.
    • Pace picks up a bit.  Round 23.  About 86% now "uncontested" and $223 Million total.  Down to 159 licenses without bids.
    • https://www.lightreading.com/5g/the-quiet-brilliance-of-t-mobiles-5g-spectrum-strategy/a/d-id/779589? Basically Money savings on 2.5 mostly rural auction are funding 600MHz purchases.  Also mentions continuing purchases of 2.5 outright. Likely understates the amount of MHz. Auction going slightly faster with 4 auction sessions per day now, but still less than 80% "settled".  After 18 rounds it is at $190 Million, with $400 to $800 Million expected. could go on for another month.  check here for updates about 1 hour after each round: https://www.sashajavid.com/FCC_Auction108.php#county_details_table_overlay
    • Yeah, I went up to Kitsap on Friday. Was able to connect to several n41 sites as SA only in Port Orchard, Bremerton and Silverdale.  However, I could not get any throughput.  It would say Mobile Data Suspended.  n41 NSA would throughput just fine. Was pushing 500-800 Mbps. I don't know if it was the network at the time or my device causing the failure for data throughput. It was the exact same result on every site I connected to.  I'm on a normal Tmo Postpaid SIM.  Nothing unusual.  LG V60. Robert n41 SA   n41 NSA
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...