little things you hate...

ctt1wbw

Well-known member
Feb 19, 2009
2,687
23
0
Visit site
Stimulus bills, pork bills, jobs bills, bail out bills, Cash for Clunkers bills, tanning salon taxes... Thanks you nut head Obama, my wife and I own a tanning salon. Douche bag.
 

ctt1wbw

Well-known member
Feb 19, 2009
2,687
23
0
Visit site
Utterly ridiculous roaming fees. Like it actually costs more money to use data if you are in another country compared to someone sitting next to you using the same cell phone on the same frequency using the same modulation downloading the same data, just because your billing address is outside the country.

Yeah, I'm talking to you, ATT Wireless, you cheats, you ****tards, you deceiving bastards. Does it really cost THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS to download 190 MEGABYTES of data?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
 

whmurray

Well-known member
Aug 20, 2003
1,719
10
0
Visit site
Utterly ridiculous roaming fees. Like it actually costs more money to use data if you are in another country compared to someone sitting next to you using the same cell phone on the same frequency using the same modulation downloading the same data, just because your billing address is outside the country.

Yeah, I'm talking to you, ATT Wireless, you cheats, you ****tards, you deceiving bastards. Does it really cost THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS to download 190 MEGABYTES of data?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
Anyone here can tell you that I am not a big fan of AT&T business practices. However, in fairness, AT&T has to pay the "roaming" carrier to provide service to their, AT&T's, customer, namely you. Some carriers are better at negotiating roaming agreements than others.
 

ctt1wbw

Well-known member
Feb 19, 2009
2,687
23
0
Visit site
Anyone here can tell you that I am not a big fan of AT&T business practices. However, in fairness, AT&T has to pay the "roaming" carrier to provide service to their, AT&T's, customer, namely you. Some carriers are better at negotiating roaming agreements than others.

Sorry, I see you've been brainwashed by the cell companies. It costs the exact same amount of money to modulate a carrier frequency in Canada as it does in the US. These fees are bogus and completely misleading and bordering on absolute fraud on the consumer. It costs the same amount of money to send a radio broadcast on a frequency-modulated carrier wave in Canada as it does in the US, and it costs the same amount of money to demodulate that carrier frequency to listen to that FM radio station.
 

ctt1wbw

Well-known member
Feb 19, 2009
2,687
23
0
Visit site
Let me expound upon this:

Two people.
Sitting side by side.
Both using iPhone 4 handsets.
Both downloading 190 megs of data.
Both on the same frequency.
One user has a Canadian billing address.
One user has a US billing address.
One user gets RAPED with a $3000 bill because he/she has a US billing address.

Same phone, same tower, same frequency, same GSM system, same handset, same amount of data...

See where I'm going with this?
 

GlennEU

Member
Sep 10, 2010
23
0
0
Glenn.eu
I'm a podcast addict and i hate it that i can't wirelessly sync all my podcasts to my iPod app on my iPhone & iPad.
Just a little thing :)
 

BLiNK

Well-known member
Oct 7, 2009
8,225
350
0
Visit site
Let me expound upon this:

Two people.
Sitting side by side.
Both using iPhone 4 handsets.
Both downloading 190 megs of data.
Both on the same frequency.
One user has a Canadian billing address.
One user has a US billing address.
One user gets RAPED with a $3000 bill because he/she has a US billing address.

Same phone, same tower, same frequency, same GSM system, same handset, same amount of data...

See where I'm going with this?

yeah, someone's gettin' bent over
 

whmurray

Well-known member
Aug 20, 2003
1,719
10
0
Visit site
yeah, someone's gettin' bent over
Really? One is native, one is roaming. Move the two south of the border and the charges would reverse.

That said, I would like to see the GSM carriers negotiate more competitive agreements. The network is really pretty flat; it does not cost Rogers a lot more to service an AT&T customer than one of its own. Moreover, there is little motive for Rogers to discourage AT&T users roaming on its network. Indeed, a lot of AT&T users are AT&T users in part to be GSM users, to be able to use their phones any place in the World, something that CDMA users cannot do and that Verizon cannot offer them. To attract people by providing the capability and then pricing such that no one dare use it, is self-defeating. If one cannot afford to use one's GSM phone, then one might as well be a CDMA user. not value to somehing that one dare not use.
 

ctt1wbw

Well-known member
Feb 19, 2009
2,687
23
0
Visit site
There is no such thing as roaming!! Guys, get it through your heads that it's something carriers charge because they CAN, not because they NEED to. Roaming boils down to your billing address and nothing more.
 

whmurray

Well-known member
Aug 20, 2003
1,719
10
0
Visit site
There is no such thing as roaming!! Guys, get it through your heads that it's something carriers charge because they CAN, not because they NEED to. Roaming boils down to your billing address and nothing more.
Perhaps. Nonetheless, the carriers spend a lot of money measuring where there load is coming from, that is from whose users, and exchanging money over it

Rogers has to expend more capital per user to provide the same coverage and capacity in their franchise than does AT&T. Moreover, they provide more service to AT&T customers than AT&T does to Rogers's customers. They are entitled to net revenue from AT&T for doing that. Thus, it costs AT&T more to provide service to their customers when they are in Canada.

You are correct that AT&T could choose to spread that extra cost evenly over all it's customers; it probably would not change the average bill by a dollar a month. The issue would be much more complicated when one includes India where costs are much higher.

I come down very much more on your side when we talk about domestic, rather than international, roaming. While AT&T publishes a map that shows where they do and do not provide service, they make a choice. Usually they do that based upon whether it is more profitable to cover by building or by buying. They should not penalize their customers for such a choice. They should not decide not to build and then charge their customer extra because of that decision.

The difference is that AT&T does not have the choice to build in Canada or India while it's customer does have the choice to use and how much in those countries.
 

ctt1wbw

Well-known member
Feb 19, 2009
2,687
23
0
Visit site
Sorry, but 190 megs of data is not a "load." Hypothetically, there could 500 people downloading 190 megs of data who live there, and one person from another country downloading 190 megs of data. Now where's the load coming from? The 500 people or the one?

Like I said, it boils down to the billing address and nothing more. It costs the same amount of money to modulate a carrier frequency no matter where your billing address is.
 

whmurray

Well-known member
Aug 20, 2003
1,719
10
0
Visit site
Sorry, but 190 megs of data is not a "load." Hypothetically, there could 500 people downloading 190 megs of data who live there, and one person from another country downloading 190 megs of data. Now where's the load coming from? The 500 people or the one?

Like I said, it boils down to the billing address and nothing more. It costs the same amount of money to modulate a carrier frequency no matter where your billing address is.

OK, I give up. You win.
 

aestival

Member
Sep 19, 2010
10
0
0
Visit site
Sorry, but 190 megs of data is not a "load." Hypothetically, there could 500 people downloading 190 megs of data who live there, and one person from another country downloading 190 megs of data. Now where's the load coming from? The 500 people or the one?

Like I said, it boils down to the billing address and nothing more. It costs the same amount of money to modulate a carrier frequency no matter where your billing address is.

Well said: since the base charges are all highway robbery to begin with, roaming is just another excuse to extract another pound of flesh. The carriers have extensive interactions and I suspect the cross-billing is virtually free for them. The only issues are ones of local capacity, but aside from major tourist destinations, that's never a real issue.
 

Trending Posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
260,011
Messages
1,765,310
Members
441,221
Latest member
CØR