06-27-2011 08:33 AM
95 ... 234
tools
  1. canesfan625's Avatar
    If that's the case, then I really don't get it. Do we both have 3G or do we have 3.25G and they have 2.89G? If we both have 3G, the data speeds should be the same. The only difference is the processing of the data, which is done by the phone, which we already paid for when we paid for the phone. Also, the way I see it, if we both did the same thing on the same website, I'd be done quicker and, thus, free up "space" on the network for someone else.
    It's the difference between whats being pulled though the network. Your feature phone could be 4g and it still wouldn't be the same i.e Your website visits are going to have more media content, streaming video and music, apps and whatever data they use, you're more likely to use your smart phone to upload video and pictures, etc. It's the same reason ISPs are trying to just cap your internet. Netflix is usually the first service they point their finger at.

    Besides that, their reasoning I gathered from the website implies that it's because smartphones use 10 times more data on average and the add-on is to allow the 10x "while on the Sprint network." Again, if that's the case, why is the add-on required even if I don't use 10 times more data than the average feature phone user on their network?
    Unless you barely touch your smart phone it would be a stretch to say you are using a similar amount of data. Over the last few weeks of just Zune and web browsing I am already pushing 1gb of data. I never came close to these when I had my Samsung A900 and A500
    06-14-2011 05:42 PM
  2. starblade876's Avatar
    Unless you barely touch your smart phone it would be a stretch to say you are using a similar amount of data. Over the last few weeks of just Zune and web browsing I am already pushing 1gb of data. I never came close to these when I had my Samsung A900 and A500
    As I said already, when I use my phone heavily, I'm usually using wifi because I find 3G to be too slow by comparison. I used the BandWidth app to do a quick check and, on average, my home wifi gets ~7.6 Mbps download and ~1.5 upload while 3G at home gets ~0.28 Mbps download and 0.20 Mbps upload. I haven't tested it in the office, but I have no doubts it will smash 3G speeds, too.

    Instead of streaming music, I usually just listen to the music I already have on the phone (if not the radio in my car). I've tried Sprint TV and, while I commend it for no noticeable buffering, the quality was definitely not something to write home about, making me have little desire to make that a usual thing. I also have the Cartoon TV app and, while it's a much higher quality, it constantly needs to buffer or wait for it to download more to be enjoyable on 3G. Besides, I have video files that were previously purchased and synced to my phone for that purpose. When I browse the web on 3G, it's usually to quickly check prices and reviews while I'm out shopping or to quickly check forums and Facebook when I'm waiting. Even then, I don't do it that often.

    According to my last bill, assuming it's in KB, I used 350,172 KB on their network. My partner, who has the terrible Samsung Transform (a low-end Android device), used significantly less with 59,640 KB. More than likely, we'll move him over to a feature phone next renewal, especially since wifi hotspot costs $30/month extra while it was FREE on the Verizon Palm Pre Plus, which actually feels as fast as the Transform despite having a slower processor... Anyway, the question still remains: if it's because of the "10 times more data," why is it required for people who don't use 10 times more data?
    06-14-2011 08:07 PM
  3. Rhody#WP's Avatar
    If that's the case, then I really don't get it. Do we both have 3G or do we have 3.25G and they have 2.89G? If we both have 3G, the data speeds should be the same. The only difference is the processing of the data, which is done by the phone, which we already paid for when we paid for the phone. Also, the way I see it, if we both did the same thing on the same website, I'd be done quicker and, thus, free up "space" on the network for someone else.

    Besides that, their reasoning I gathered from the website implies that it's because smartphones use 10 times more data on average and the add-on is to allow the 10x "while on the Sprint network." Again, if that's the case, why is the add-on required even if I don't use 10 times more data than the average feature phone user on their network?
    Totally agree. That 10x logic doesn't fly. It's like saying, "for one price we'll give you unlimited data... unless you actually use it... then you pay more."
    06-14-2011 09:43 PM
  4. Rhody#WP's Avatar
    These "what ifs" are getting out of control.

    There would never be a "premium food" fee because of how buffets work. Quick turnover, recycled food, and more often than not people fill up on low cost starches and the operation has lower labor costs. Furthermore, people tend to eat less at a buffet then the standard entree size at a restaurant.
    You have a knack for missing (or avoiding) the point.
    06-14-2011 09:43 PM
  5. Duvi's Avatar
    I wonder what would happen if an "all you can eat" restaurant charged large people a "premium food" fee because it's possible they could eat more. Would people stand for that?
    That was a very bad example. I work in NYC, so I have experienced "premium" fees (as you call it) for buffets. And now that I'm wring this, every place that charges kids less for buffets are doing essentially the same thing, no? If it's unlimited, why is this kid getting charged less? Oh I know why, because they'll eat less. Why do senior citizens get a free bus ride? Aren't we all taking the same bus?

    These "what ifs" are getting out of control.

    There would never be a "premium food" fee because of how buffets work. Quick turnover, recycled food, and more often than not people fill up on low cost starches and the operation has lower labor costs. Furthermore, people tend to eat less at a buffet then the standard entree size at a restaurant.
    Exactly.
    06-14-2011 10:17 PM
  6. Duvi's Avatar
    If that's the case, then I really don't get it. Do we both have 3G or do we have 3.25G and they have 2.89G? If we both have 3G, the data speeds should be the same. The only difference is the processing of the data, which is done by the phone, which we already paid for when we paid for the phone. Also, the way I see it, if we both did the same thing on the same website, I'd be done quicker and, thus, free up "space" on the network for someone else.


    I'll try to break it down as much as I can.

    Guy A: searches for images on google.com and has a 3G smartphone.

    Guy B: searches for images on google.com and has a 3G feature phone.

    Full HTML on the 3G smartphone will use more GB and take longer to load because the quality will be much better than on the 3G feature phone which will load the basics in which the pictures quality will not be as good either.

    Besides that, their reasoning I gathered from the website implies that it's because smartphones use 10 times more data on average and the add-on is to allow the 10x "while on the Sprint network." Again, if that's the case, why is the add-on required even if I don't use 10 times more data than the average feature phone user on their network?
    So... you'd like Sprint to make a plan for "starblade876" because you use wifi? Let me ask you... the windows phone that you have, how do you think the company is keeping the exclusive for the device?

    The "majority" aka "on average", not "all". Big difference. If they said "all smartphone users consume 10X more beta", then maybe your point would be valid, but they didn't.
    06-14-2011 10:48 PM
  7. starblade876's Avatar


    I'll try to break it down as much as I can.

    Guy A: searches for images on google.com and has a 3G smartphone.

    Guy B: searches for images on google.com and has a 3G feature phone.

    Full HTML on the 3G smartphone will use more GB and take longer to load because the quality will be much better than on the 3G feature phone which will load the basics in which the pictures quality will not be as good either.
    Your original argument was that total amount of data didn't matter. Also, I'm pretty sure there are a few feature phones that display full HTML now. According to this review, the LG Rumor Touch has a full HTML browser as well as social networking apps. Even if the feature phones use less data on average on the network, again, why is the add-on required for everyone even if you don't use as much data as a feature phone? So... yeah, you really didn't explain anything.

    So... you'd like Sprint to make a plan for "starblade876" because you use wifi?
    What kind of question is that? Of course, I would. Only an ***** wouldn't want their own personalized plan.

    Actually, with smartphones on Sprint, we have no tiered options; it's unlimited or nothing. So, I'd let them rename it to whatever and allow other people to get that plan, too. I'm not greedy.

    Let me ask you... the windows phone that you have, how do you think the company is keeping the exclusive for the device?
    The company already lost the "exclusive" now that US Cellular has/is getting the 7 Pro. Anyway, I'm pretty sure they don't constantly need to pay HTC an exorbitant amount for such a thing. Even if they did, I'm pretty sure they would make more than enough without the extra $10/month.

    The "majority" aka "on average", not "all". Big difference. If they said "all smartphone users consume 10X more beta", then maybe your point would be valid, but they didn't.
    So, I'm paying for the average use or, in other words, I'm paying for someone else's data, which is what I said earlier. I'm glad you agree their explanation is BS. Thanks.
    06-15-2011 12:12 AM
  8. Rhody#WP's Avatar
    That was a very bad example. I work in NYC, so I have experienced "premium" fees (as you call it) for buffets. And now that I'm wring this, every place that charges kids less for buffets are doing essentially the same thing, no? If it's unlimited, why is this kid getting charged less? Oh I know why, because they'll eat less. Why do senior citizens get a free bus ride? Aren't we all taking the same bus?
    Actually, it looks like you agree with me. If they have a kids price and an adult price for a buffet, then they should have separate "unlimited data for feature phone" and "unlimited data for smart phone" plans.
    06-15-2011 08:32 AM
  9. Rhody#WP's Avatar
    So, I'm paying for the average use or, in other words, I'm paying for someone else's data, which is what I said earlier. I'm glad you agree their explanation is BS. Thanks.
    I know, these guys keep explaining the difference between a feature phone and a smart phone, which we know. They're not explaining anything at all about what you get for the $10/month.

    If I'm already getting unlimited data, then what do I get for that $10? Nobody can explain this to me.
    06-15-2011 08:44 AM
  10. oldpueblo's Avatar
    You get a bill!
    06-15-2011 06:46 PM
  11. king5697#CB's Avatar
    They would have did themselves a favor if they would have just made everyone pay the premium fee from the get go for smart phones instead of starting it with 4G phones and then all smart phones.
    06-15-2011 07:06 PM
  12. SolarPlexus's Avatar
    I know, these guys keep explaining the difference between a feature phone and a smart phone, which we know. They're not explaining anything at all about what you get for the $10/month.

    If I'm already getting unlimited data, then what do I get for that $10? Nobody can explain this to me.
    Your thinking too hard!
    :D
    It helps if you try not to apply logic. :)
    06-16-2011 05:33 AM
  13. tiny's Avatar
    They would have did themselves a favor if they would have just made everyone pay the premium fee from the get go for smart phones instead of starting it with 4G phones and then all smart phones.
    This.

    But hindsight is 20/20.
    06-16-2011 12:16 PM
  14. canesfan625's Avatar
    Actually, it looks like you agree with me. If they have a kids price and an adult price for a buffet, then they should have separate "unlimited data for feature phone" and "unlimited data for smart phone" plans.
    Kids menus being cheaper has no relationship to this. Kids menus are cheaper because restaurant chains know that kids reign supreme in FMCG purchase related to food product.

    anyways, this thread has just turned into people contradicting themselves every other post between it just being semantics and having to pay the money because they think it doesn't bring any value. Pick one please.
    06-17-2011 02:00 PM
  15. Rhody#WP's Avatar
    anyways, this thread has just turned into people contradicting themselves every other post between it just being semantics and having to pay the money because they think it doesn't bring any value. Pick one please.
    That's not a contradiction. It doesn't bring any value. Sprint just used semantics to make it seem like it does. I would gladly pay more money if I got something for my money other than calling the data I was already getting "premium data."

    "Hey, lucky you! We're going to give you the same unlimited data, but now -- and just for you smart phone users -- we're going to call it 'premium data.' That's worth $10/month, right?"

    Anyway, I'm done with this thread. Some people are just incapable of understanding or too stubborn to see a different perspective.
    06-17-2011 02:27 PM
  16. canesfan625's Avatar
    Data usage article on the front page is ironic. Perfect timing is perfect.

    Seemingly, by the words of the OP, Sprint was choosing between doing away with unlimited data for smart phones (which Verizon was apparently considering at one point) or the fee. The semantics argument works but the "value" argument is still invalid.

    by the way, could you argue this to Microsoft? XBL went up in cost and there wasn't any added value. Maybe they will drop the price back down.
    06-20-2011 10:11 AM
  17. HeyCori's Avatar
    by the way, could you argue this to Microsoft? XBL went up in cost and there wasn't any added value. Maybe they will drop the price back down.
    Not true. MS has added tons of content and features to XBL since it original launched.
    06-26-2011 08:53 AM
  18. gerrymad's Avatar
    I had a Pre. To go from that to the HTC Arrive would have cost and extra $10/month. The move would have been from a smart phone to a smart phone. No change in the class of phone yet they were going to start hitting me with the premium data service fee. That seemed wrong. I could maybe understand if there was a reason to expect my usage to go up, but I already had a smart phone and I was likely to keep using a new phone the same way I had used my Pre.

    By the way on the Sprint page right now if you look for a phone the Arrive is at the bottom of the page. You have to scroll past all the phones including the feature phones and things like the Samsung M360 which is a super basic phone. What are the odds somebody is going to buy the Arrive from their web site? This product placement is despite the fact that the phone has a 4.5 star rating on their site.
    06-26-2011 07:19 PM
  19. Duvi's Avatar
    I had a Pre. To go from that to the HTC Arrive would have cost and extra $10/month. The move would have been from a smart phone to a smart phone. No change in the class of phone yet they were going to start hitting me with the premium data service fee. That seemed wrong. I could maybe understand if there was a reason to expect my usage to go up, but I already had a smart phone and I was likely to keep using a new phone the same way I had used my Pre.

    By the way on the Sprint page right now if you look for a phone the Arrive is at the bottom of the page. You have to scroll past all the phones including the feature phones and things like the Samsung M360 which is a super basic phone. What are the odds somebody is going to buy the Arrive from their web site? This product placement is despite the fact that the phone has a 4.5 star rating on their site.
    I am pretty much done with this thread, but since you're just posting in this thread, I'm responding.

    Sprint can not just start charging the $10 fee. Last time they did, I was able to get 3 Treo devices (2 700p, 1 700wx) free of charge or I was going to at&t and getting 750s. It allowed everyone the opportunity to leave w/o penalty.

    Also, the Arrive you have, do you believe HTC just gives them exclusivity out of the blue? Sprint has to pay for exclusives. There will be a lot of devices coming to Sprint that will be exclusive to Sprint (some Sprint-only and some first dibs in the coming months). Your $10 premium fee is not only for usage, but so you are afforded these devices and many other benefits.

    The Pre you came from... you know how many users switched to the EVO 3D from the Pre on Friday/Saturday? Now if Sprint doesn't get exclusives, others may have this device and may have wanted to go elsewhere. Heck, there are quite a few holding out on the Pre3.
    06-26-2011 11:50 PM
  20. gerrymad's Avatar
    They could not start charging the fee on the Pre I already had. They can and do start charging on a new phone since that requires a new contract. In fact they would have charged the $10 fee for any repalcement smartphone. If I bought a new Pre and put it on there I would have gotten charged the $10. It was not just for the exclusive phones. My point was I was looking at going from a 3G Pre to a new 3G phone and my behavior/usage would not have changed yet their price would have gone up. They called it a "premium data fee" They did not tie it to new or exclusive phones. Since I had to sign a new contract I evaluated all phone and carrier options and said goodbye to Sprint.
    06-27-2011 08:33 AM
95 ... 234
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD