RSST-Mobile to drop 1G data cap for G1, while throttling heavy users
By Jacqueline Emigh | Published September 26, 2008, 1:54 PM
1:55 pm EST September 26, 2008 - T-Mobile told BetaNews today it has now removed a 1 GB monthly data cap on the Android-based G1 from its policy statement, confirming our earlier report that the wireless carrier is dropping plans to impose a cap. A T-Mobile spokesperson also said that revamped 3G data plans will be "shared broadly with all customers" as soon as those plans are finalized.
The full text of the T-Mobile spokesperson's statement to BetaNews this morning follows:
"Our goal, when the T-Mobile G1 becomes available in October, is to provide affordable, high-speed data service allowing customers to experience the full data capabilities of the device and our 3G network. At the same time, we have a responsibility to provide the best network experience for all of our customers so we reserve the right to temporarily reduce data throughput for a small fraction of our customers who have excessive or disproportionate usage that interferes with our network performance or our ability to provide quality service to all of our customers.
"We removed the 1 GB soft limit from our policy statement, and we are confident that T-Mobile G1 customers will enjoy the high speed of data access over our 3G network. The specific terms for our new data plans are still being reviewed and once they are final we will be certain to share this broadly with all customers."
11:47 am EDT September 25, 2008 - T-Mobile has reportedly dropped its plans to implement a 1 GB monthly data cap for its forthcoming G1, the first Android-based mobile phone, moving instead to a a "throttling" or "slowdown" approach for heavy users.
As first reported in The New York Times, T-Mobile's decision in favor of an unlimited data plan comes in response to complaints from many potential customers that 1 GB of data usage won't meet their needs in using the G1 phone launched earlier this week.
T-Mobile, however, is reserving the right to "temporarily reduce data throughput for a small fraction of our customers who have excessive or disproportionate usage that interferes with out network performance or our ability to provide quality service to all customers," according to an e-mail from T-Mobile to the Times.
As previously reported in BetaNews, Comcast recently proposed a slowdown plan known as "Fair Share" after the Federal Communications Commission found the US-based ISP had engaged in "unreasonable management practices" in blocking P2P applications such as BitTorrent and Acquisition. Under Fair Share, Comcast wants to throttle the top speeds for heavy users for 10- to 20-minute blocks of time.
At this writing, though, T-Mobile has not yet released any details as to how it will go about slowing down the traffic of heavy users.
Meanwhile, Time Warner Cable is testing out an alternative "tiered pricing" model -- in which top users are charged higher rates -- in Beaumont, Texas.
Even before T-Mobile's G1 launch, some users attending the recent Interop conference in New York City voiced concerns that more service providers would start to impose data usage caps.
In response to a question from one audience member, Scott Siegler, mobile infrastructure analyst at Dell'Oro Group and moderator of a panel on 4G wireless, mentioned tiered pricing as one of the methods that providers are considering for handling bandwidth issues.
Other panelists suggested, though, that bandwidth limitations won't be as problematic on wireless networks such as WiMAX and LTE as on cable networks, for example, due to factors that include a relatively abundant 4G spectrum and less reliance on physical infrastructure.
T-Mobile, however, is just now moving from "2.5G" to a 3G HSPDA wireless network. The carrier plans to complete its migration to 3G in the top 27 US markets by the end of this year, with the remaining markets to follow, said Mitch Lustig, T-Mobile USA's senior manager of product development, in an interview with BetaNews earlier this week.
I love the phone.
Score: 0
|Thankfully many businesses/schools/homes offer/have free wifi, which helps many users stay under the cap that most carriers place on "unlimited data." If it weren't for free wifi, I'd bust through the T-Mobile 1G limit every month. I'd probably come close to the At&T 5G limit with my iPhone every month too!
http://googlesandroid.wordpress.com
Score: 0
|Thank god they dropped the 1GB cap. This means I can download more than 3 iPhone firmware updates in one month!!! WOHOOOO!
Score: 0
|A couple of questions:
1 - How do carriers in non-US markets actually handle this? How is it done in the EU
2 - How much data can a regular user run up with regular usage? For example how many hours of Hulu or something can one watch before hitting limits - to put this into practical terms?
Score: 0
|Those are good questions and they should be the questions ISP's should be asking. With more people downloading free games, updates, streaming music and video, these are important questions to ask before going off the handle and throttling or charging overages on people.
Score: 0
|Maybe a few more oh so irate consumers should inquire regarding this before signing up and then acting amazed that they failed to ask about something about something they assert is of such fundamental importance.
Gee whiz! I got a great deal at the Ford dealership on an oil filter, but it won't fit my Chevy! Damned dealership!
Score: 0
|Well, from what I understand some people are asking these questions but carriers/ISPs get away without publishing transparent throttling policies.
I find it unacceptable that regulators let this pass, since obviously there is no other choice than signing up with one of them if one has any data requirement.
Score: 0
|I suspect that few, in fact, do.
Then if one does subscribe to a service, they do so with the understanding that a regular consumer account may be throttled - as NO consumer account with any carrier is designed for high bandwidth traffic or web hosting! And this has ALWAYS been the case as substantiated by the various tiers of service.
If they anticipate greater needs, then they should inquire into a business account that is specifically structured for such traffic.
As much as one can complain, this is NOTHING new, and anyone utilizing such bandwidth is in no position to feign ignorance of the issue.
...well, except on this site, where ignorance is such a grand tradition and on display in such great abundance...
Score: 0
|Oh I knew the business account argument was coming but find it out of context.
What does streaming online TV, which is going mainstream have to do with requiring a business account? What does expecting transparent contracts that clearly spell out what you are paying for, and what you are not supposed to expect have to do with a business account?
Score: 0
|Yup, this entire issue is affecting the average user huh?
You take an exceptional case and extrapolate it to affect every consumer who streams videos. LOL!
And the 'business' account is that in name and reference only! It is an account specifically for higher bandwidth usage, be it a personal website or server or for a business. ANYONE who needs the higher bandwidth, and also usually a static IP address as opposed to a temporary dynamically assigned IP address.
But since this has been standard practice for as long as online access has been available, why should anyone be expected to be aware of it - especially the erudite tech (if not business) savvy audience that frequents this site!
There is nothing wrong with having companies state their policies. But the policies are evolving with changing user and market patterns.
Sorry if that concept konfuzs you, but then Tool already explained the issue with choice and Windows users. ;-)
Score: 0
|You are supposed to be entertaining but you bore me! What's up with this?
Score: 0
|No wonder you are upset at Apple's refusal to redistribute a fart generator.
Score: 0
|I know what you mean. I got bored with him long ago.
Score: 0
|He could just hire you instead.....
Score: 0
|He couldn't afford me.
What, no anti-US rant?
Score: 0
|And yet he still responds right on cue.
So predictable.
Score: 0
|Why should I when you're doing just fine being the traitor you are. There is nothing treasonous than a libertopian since you hate Americans so much.
Its your way of thinking that has caused the mess now with the $700 billion bailout. Regulations are needed for a very good reason. Reaganomics never worked, too much greed.
Score: 0
|Sometimes playing with a fool breaks things up a little. That's why I still bother with you. [smiles]
Score: 0
|B.S.
Score: 0
|That's just your usual grin after eating more sh!t.
Score: 0
|We pay for data packs in Australia - and depending on the carrier/coverage it can be fairly cheap or quite expensive. I think packages up to about 10GB are available now, but they're quite pricey.
My iPhone plan includes 500MB of data. I used it flat-out last month and only hit 150MB. But I do have access to WiFi at work and at home... :p
Score: 0
|Clueless as usual.
The bailout is an indirect result of the Clinton FHA debacle. It was *due* to regulation of the housing market. It had *nothing* to do with "Reaganomics", which would never have involved government diddling around with the housing market. Once the housing market crashed (Due to the existence of those loans pushed by the FHA), it dominoed to the mortgage securities, financial institutions, and brokers. They did not have the foresight to see the effect such funding (to artificially boost the housing market) would have 10 years down the line in other, mortgage affected markets. (Regulation allowed for abuse of the free-market system, without which (the regulation), we'd likely have had a much smaller housing crash in the late 90's, but because of which we're now looking at possibly a Trillion Dollar Bail-Out.)
Helps to have a clue what you're talking about before running your mouth off.
Score: 0
|