T-mobile one a scam against net neutrality?

[Closingracer]

Tbh it's great that they offer "unlimited" data and how they are marketing it is very bad IMHO. They are stating we would get unlimited 4G data but they never said anything about having only 480p or did quality video.... This was an ad on the radio. Isn't against what net neutrality goes for?

 

[Quis89]

Tbh it's great that they offer "unlimited" data and how they are marketing it is very bad IMHO. They are stating we would get unlimited 4G data but they never said anything about having only 480p or did quality video.... This was an ad on the radio. Isn't against what net neutrality goes for?

Best definition of net neutrality I could find states,

Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers and governments regulating the Internet should treat all data on the Internet the same, not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or mode of communication.

I think it's a grey area. T-Mobile (and Sprint) is simply charging you more if you want "higher quality" data connections. They aren't limiting your data consumption. You still "technically" have unlimited. If you chose their base plan with the speeds they provide you can stream and do whatever you want til your hearts content. You have the option to upgrade those speeds and enjoy a higher "quality" connection that allows for better audio and video streams.

I do believe their campaign that allowed certain services to not use your data while others did violates Net Neutrality. But I'm not so sure about this one. I imagine it will be a while before we reach a point where we get truly unlimited data at any speed.

I do wish they would be more transparent about the fact that you have to pay extra if you want true 4G connection speeds and the quality of stream that comes with that.

 

[metllicamilitia]

Best definition of net neutrality I could find states,


I think it's a grey area. T-Mobile (and Sprint) is simply charging you more if you want "higher quality" data connections. They aren't limiting your data consumption. You still "technically" have unlimited. If you chose their base plan with the speeds they provide you can stream and do whatever you want til your hearts content. You have the option to upgrade those speeds and enjoy a higher "quality" connection that allows for better audio and video streams.

I do believe their campaign that allowed certain services to not use your data while others did violates Net Neutrality. But I'm not so sure about this one. I imagine it will be a while before we reach a point where we get truly unlimited data at any speed.

I do wish they would be more transparent about the fact that you have to pay extra if you want true 4G connection speeds and the quality of stream that comes with that.

That's almost correct, the 4G speed for data never changes. They limit the quality of video, which has nothing to do with data speed. They cap video quality at DVD as opposed to HDDVD or Blu-Ray. You have to pay more for high quality HD video, which is playing favorites to their service and by requiring you to pay extra for that service it is a very clear breach of net neutrality.

 

[bobbob1016]

I think it's somewhat better that they're demonstrating they just want money. That's why Netflix can pay them to not count against the "needed" data caps. I agree they should be able to limit people who are torrenting* on the network, but they're double dipping. They're charging me to access what Netflix/Hulu/YouTube is already paying them for.

*Torrents have a huge amount of overhead. Open connections, quick connections, and similar. At least torrent behind a VPN so your data is clean on the cellular and dirty/massive at the VPN's side.

 

[Quis89]

That's almost correct, the 4G speed for data never changes. They limit the quality of video, which has nothing to do with data speed. They cap video quality at DVD as opposed to HDDVD or Blu-Ray. You have to pay more for high quality HD video, which is playing favorites to their service and by requiring you to pay extra for that service it is a very clear breach of net neutrality.

I was under the impression that only the content provider can limit the quality.

For example here are the speed recommendations for Netflix,

0.5 Megabits per second - Required broadband connection speed
1.5 Megabits per second - Recommended broadband connection speed
3.0 Megabits per second - Recommended for SD quality
5.0 Megabits per second - Recommended for HD quality
25 Megabits per second - Recommended for Ultra HD quality

Netflix, as the content provider, will adjust your stream quality based on the speeds of your connection. So if Sprint is only allowing 1.5 megabits per second, Netflix isn't going to allow an SD quality stream. So it is Sprint that is controlling the speeds your data transmits and Netflix adjusts the quality of the stream accordingly.

I could have this all wrong though. That's just the way I've always understood it.

 

[bobbob1016]

TMo kind of is breaking Net Neutrality. If they limited everyone to 480p, they're fine. But they're allowing companies to pay to not be counted against your data for Music. So Google, Apple, and Spotify can afford to pay TMo for that, but SoundCloud can't afford to pay that price, nor can the next big thing. They are getting treated differently.

Edit: I realize TMo has dropped the "binge on" thing that basically meant the user would prefer Spotify since Spotify paid TMo to not count against data. That is what breaks NetNeutrality.

 

[duckduckgoose]

TMo kind of is breaking Net Neutrality. If they limited everyone to 480p, they're fine. But they're allowing companies to pay to not be counted against your data for Music. So Google, Apple, and Spotify can afford to pay TMo for that, but SoundCloud can't afford to pay that price, nor can the next big thing. They are getting treated differently.

Edit: I realize TMo has dropped the "binge on" thing that basically meant the user would prefer Spotify since Spotify paid TMo to not count against data. That is what breaks NetNeutrality.

Won't have to worry about it soon anyway, the republicans are going to do away with it. Dumb asses.

 

[bobbob1016]

Won't have to worry about it soon anyway, the republicans are going to do away with it. Dumb asses.

Thanks for making it political, without citing anything. Beyond that, the new FCC guy said he'd allow zero-rating since "the public seemed ok with it". Meaning if/when Google makes enough noise about it, it'd be a thing. Wheeler wasn't a fan of it either to be honest. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpbOEoRrHyU