yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[HTC EVO 3D] mlin:
Obviously for some people its just not realistic. Me, I have no reason to watch Netflix on my phone nor do I spend much time looking at youtube. I do listen to Pandora during my daily commute but on most months my data isn't even over 2gb.

I can see why people who spend hours and hours streaming video to their phones would be against the idea. My issue is that when I want to stream video to my phone the data is so damn slow half the time it ruins the experience anyway.

---------- Post added at 08:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:06 PM ----------

I think its a bit of both. I hardly believe that 20 million productive people checking emails, FB, twitter, and the occasional video throughout the day causes as much bandwidth hogging as 20 million people streaming videos, and torrenting music and porn to their desktop while tethering with their Sprint device.
[HTC EVO 3D] Sad Panda:
I think this is the most level headed response. Some people do use a lot of data, even on their phone, but I have to wonder how someone has enough time (away from home) to use Netflix or you tube or any other time and data consuming usage. Because again unless you are specifically paying for tethering the only time it is ethical to be tethering and using data from another device than phone is on a laptop away from home where there isn't wifi. Can someone seriously say they spend that much time in that scenario?
[HTC EVO 3D] ckoadiyn:
I can sometimes all I have is a netbook n it sucks playing netflix or YouTube so usually I watch stuff on my phone like YouTube etc n the home internet is about as fast as my phone is sometimes n at work I just sit there pretty much n can watch stuff but I dl most stuff on their internet n watch it on a work comp or ps3 at home . Reason internet is slow at where I'm at it isn't my house its my gfs moms as my house is crowded n she won't pay for faster speeds
[HTC EVO 3D] life64x:
my netflix for that week was up camping with some buddies...we already watched the movies we brought with us and it was a local beach here in california, (yes, you can camp at the beach at some state parks here..:) ) and the youtube is during my lunch break outside where we have no wifi...i understand where using the home network is better, but my cord was not long enough to go 20 miles from my house. what many fail to see is that as the phones get more capable, it will soon replace the home computer..thats what tablets are doing was we get more into web services..now is nothing..5 years from now...data usage will skyrocket...the infrastructure is just getting in place and the phones are getting as powerful as netbooks...in some cases..the new kal-el chip will surpass some computers of just a couple years ago. This means data usage will increase...even if you and i stand still.
[HTC EVO 3D] novanosis85:
Tiered data won't increase speeds. All it does is limit you to a cap. You still have the same amount of users.
[HTC EVO 3D] heathmcabee:
I can't help but agree with your integration of technology that will foresee the next couple of years. Only and IF ONLY we can get the graphics departments to catch up and get that into a tablet then we will see total desktop deceleration. The graphics cards of today cannot possibly be powered by a tablet and the batteries will not hold enough charge for 10 minutes. This is the only part that is holding this progression of technology when it comes to it's peak. There will need to be some new kind of tech to actually get it to that point where desktop do not exist.

Oh and guys..

https://network.sprint.com/

Check out your newest upgrade and past upgrades and tower locations.
[HTC EVO 3D] mlin:
i think there is more appeal to a desktop than graphics capabilities. What about comfort, convenience, local storage and ease of use? I much prefer my desktop to my ipad, thinkpad, or evo 3d when it comes to getting things done on the computer or simply browsing the web.

Edit: Thanks for the link.
[HTC EVO 3D] freeza:
TBH, I wasn't too happy about the possibility of data caps, but after seeing how little I do use my mobile data, I welcome the change.

Anyone who relies on their cell phone data be it 3G or WiMAX as their primary internet connection and actually use that much data in a month that it could potentially ruin it for legit users in the future deserve to be dropped, capped, and whatever else can be done to rid the network of abusive users like that.
[HTC EVO 3D] flonker:
It's sad that this thought even has to enter one's mind. That people are folding to providers. Why would anyone suggest "cap me," "throttle my connection so I can relive the experience I had with my 56k dial-up..."

It is complete BS.

When I was little I had a lemonade stand. I didn't sell lemonade to people if I didn't have enough. If I was selling lemonade for 10¢ a cup, and I only had enough left for one cup, I wouldn't dump it into three cups and and sell it to three people for 10¢ a cup. I would make more lemonade first. I was 5 and I understood this was the right way to do business. Obviously, the phone companies still haven't figured this out. They take on new customers even though their network can't support them. Now customers are saying, "It's cool, just water down my lemonade..."

Screw that.

For my first cell phone I payed almost $1 a minute. Later, I had a contact for $65 a month for like 200 minutes. Yes, the technology was new, but these companies were making a killing. Check the records. And what did they do with this money? Reinvest it into their network? Not especially.

Every company will say the same thing, "We didn't realize smart phones were going to take off the way they did..." Well then, why the hell are these people in charge of cellular phone companies? Maybe they should find someone that doesn't have their head up their ass.

I'm not going to pay for their mistake, if I pay for internet on my phone, I want internet on my phone. Throttling? Data caps? Are you kidding me? Build a network that can support your current customers before taking on those you can't handle. I knew that when I was 5.

Sorry for the rant, I'm sick of this crap.
[HTC EVO 3D] life64x:
What ever the situation is, unlimited or caps on data or throttling on data, I really don't see it improving for sprint in the near term. Long term, I think it's anybody's quess. I do know the iPhone 4s is selling lime crazy..2 friends at 2 different sprint stores tell me that it is a good seller..this simply mean more users. Phone type really is not the question, it's how many users are on our crappy network. I near the stories of readers here saying they have good service and speed, but overall, it seems slow across the board. Possibly it will get fixed in next year or so. I remember I could watch a YouTube video with no refresh, and sometimes a delay..now the delay is the norm and one without any refresh is far in-between each other. Oh well, to wish does not help.
[HTC EVO 3D] Zabalba:
I find it humorous no one has really mentioned or sited where you guys and or Sprint are getting the information that heavy users are tearing up the bandwidth. Give me some numbers. Actual numbers. Not speculation.

Now on the other hand you can safely assume Sprint, as a company (and any other publicly traded company) first and foremost job is to provide a profit to its shareholders.

Which is more likely:

1. Sprint only invest the bare minimum necessary into its network to continue to be competitive to its peers

or

2. Sprint prepares to remove unlimited because "Heavy users" bogging down the network and not the actual number of new customers it has received (Boost, Cricket as well).

I'll give you a hint. It might be both.
[HTC EVO 3D] xHausx:
Exactly.

This has to be a troll thread. There's just... no.
[HTC EVO 3D] xHausx:
3. Its possible they had a shortage of parts or ended up spending way too much money on clearwire & the iPhone instead
[HTC EVO 3D] theANDROIDosX:
I agree with Freeza....I welcome a cap or tiered data! This will rid the network of thousands of users who don't want the new data plan, thousands more people because they'll finally accept they can't afford to look rich while they are actually broke, and Sprint will terminate thousands more for abusing there network! This will then creep down to metropcs and boost mobile and there's thousands more terminated for deciding to abuse instead of pay for the extra data!

WORK FOR YOUR MONEY!! STOP ABUSING EVERYTHING YOU TOUCH!
[HTC EVO 3D] life64x:
one problem, we dont have access to those figures...company info like that is probaly internal..i could be wrong and maybe they provide it..actual speeds of areas...probaly internal sensitive information. you want numbers..heres on for you, i been on and off with sprint about 10 years...in the beginning speeds are fantastic and everybody happy with service..down the road and recently...more of my buddies are saying wtf for speed..i dont need numbers to tell me this...speed is going downhill. for me and others. until sprint catches up with all the new users...infrastructure wise...its a waiting game. I could be wrong and i am in the minority of users who have ****ty speeds,,and the majority of users have speeds equal to the other carriers. does sprint have even half of the numbers for 4g areas side by side to tmobile, verizon, att?

you want numbers? count how many cities have 4g service...with the leading carriers...and thats only one side of the equation. sprint is behind in that(4g), data speeds,,hell a recent article i forgot who wrote it states cricket has better service speeds than sprint,,cricket of all carriers!(this should tell you something since cricket, virgin, boost use same---sprint network)
[HTC EVO 3D] willy900wonka:
I imagine the O poster will get kudos from all the other cell network providers.

No Sprint commercials with Unlimited, in time no Sprint.

Wow that's an idea, no Sprint. Watch then as your data limits drop and costs soar.

Some times less is really less, and not more.
[HTC EVO 3D] xHausx:
You guys obviously have no idea how much of a killing US carriers are making on data charges. Because, if you did, you would be absolutely disgusted and you would realize why the thought of people actually asking for limits makes me lose faith in the collective intelligence of this country.

Its just stupid, go to another carrier already lol
[HTC EVO 3D] Ryno_666:
+10
[HTC EVO 3D] Rob the plumber:
T-pain mobile......stupid auto correct!
[HTC EVO 3D] diablc:
Maybe I don't understand the OP, but what can't you do that makes the data rate a huge deal. I watch Netflix fine download games etc etc but I am also in Atlanta so I have no problem with a signal
[HTC EVO 3D] NewZJ:
does anybody know how much Sprint pays for the data?

what if it is cheaper than you expect?

ie if Sprint data cost was $1 per 100Gb (which is astronomically higher than going rates) then people can use as much as they can and the cost wouldn't be prohibitive to Sprint in keeping unlimited data

the true cost to Sprint is in the towers, the cost of the spectrum, the backbone costs, the hardware, the landlines supplying the towers, the electricity for all the components.

it is the number of subscribers and active connections maintained that makes the data slow, not the people downloading/YouTube/streaming etc

the tower bandwidth is divided among the connections, not shared, ex. if you are the only connection then you don't get the full 100mb connection that the tower has, you may obtain maximum speeds yes but not the full speeds. say the tower has 10000 connections, you get 1/10000 of the speed regardless of if the other 9999 are torrenting or checking emails or not using the data

Sprint must either increase the tower backbone or add more towers to reduce the number of active connections to increase the speeds
[HTC EVO 3D] nate420:
Xhausx even though I never wanna be throttled/tiered again and agree with most of what you are saying... I think its kinda like the idea "kill one,save a thousand"

Everyone is so sick of having poor data speeds instead of calling sprint/emailing Dan@sprint.com they form a Lynch mob in hopes to stop one user from ruining it for a thousand....

I really think its just there horrible towers and failed Wimax that has them scrambling for solutions to help relieve their outdated stressed towers...

Just my opinion on the general consensus
[HTC EVO 3D] Sad Panda:
So are you trying to say you support unlimited or don't? The point you made is the same that a lot of people have already made. If you cap or throttle data it limits the number of connections. Bandwidth and throughput speed are fundamentally different, but like you say there is only two possible options to increase network performance, and that is to decrease traffic, or upgrade equipment so that bandwidth is increased. I will go back to my traffic jam analogy. A high speed limit is worthless if the number of cars on the road is higher than the number of lanes can support. Without making the post longer I hope I don't have to explain in detail the analogy. You can see the comparison of how throughput speed and bandwidth relate to each other in the traffic analogy. It works the same way with network congestion. Add lanes to handle more cars at the same time or decrease the #of cars on the road so they can travel closer to the speed limit
[HTC EVO 3D] NewZJ:
I'm for unlimited. capping and throttling won't solve the problems. they need more towers and better backbone

with the cost of data being so cheap there is no reason to cap plans unless they want to charge customers the overage charges
[HTC EVO 3D] Mastajeff:
This. ^^^^
[HTC EVO 3D] ClanUrdnot:
Bravo sir
[HTC EVO 3D] xHausx:
I think AT&T is probably to blame for this misconception, they used people who abuse the unlimited plans as an excuse to cap their data plans when NewZJ was spot on with what the real issue is. AT&T didn't have enough spectrum to support all of their customers so they had to find some way to cut back on people connecting to their towers; that also happen to be the only reason they want to buy TMobile, their spectrum.

Limiting data will not do anything to help data speeds when Sprint's towers have more people connected to them than they can handle. When there's not enough capacity/bandwidth it's like trying to have multiple people carry on a conversation on the same phone. You would have to take turns after each word so it would take forever to say something.
[HTC EVO 3D] Sad Panda:
Sprint is one of the largest backbones in the us, they have built onto the backbone for years, before cell networks were anymore than an idea in someone's head. I doubt the backbone is the problem. Data is cheap on the backbone level because of the huge amount of speed and bandwidth they produce per unit cost. The mobile side is where the problem is, I don't think a lot of you realize how expensive data is on that level. It is difficult because of the shear number of units you need to cover square area. Where as wired networks have the ability to have millions of customers tied into the same network equipment, mobile networks need lots more equipment to cover a square unit area. So the reasoning that data is cheap and we are getting screwed is not completely accurate. We get screwed in the home internet industry, but much less in the mobile industry.

I think you are kidding yourselves if you think capping data doesn't decrease network usage. If you use up your 5gb in 14 days then there is one less person on the network for two Weeks. If you cap data and spread your usage across the whole month, it is simple math, less data transferred equal more potential for that same amount of data to be transferred by someone else on the network. There is only so much data that can be transferred at the same time, and if you take that privilege away from people it means the data they can transfer can be done in a shorter period of time.

I'm not basing my facts on something I think to be correct I am basing it on what I know to be correct, it is based on my education and experience, I make my living being an engineer and having a deep knowledge in topics like this is the only reason I have a job.
[HTC EVO 3D] NewZJ:
capping data doesn't decrease network usage. it creates overage charges.

when you reach your cap it doesn't turn your connection off.

the tower data connections are not similar to home wifi that the connection is "shared". they are provisioned so each person gets their fair share even of they are not currently using it, only turning the data off on the phone will make your connection be removed
[HTC EVO 3D] xHausx:
Their backbone may be good but the backhaul carrying data from the towers I suspect is lacking. Especially if it's true that most of them still rely on a single T1 line. Between that and them having more devices connected to the base station than it was meant to have and you got one very slow network.

I don't know, I just cannot see any situation where capping data would be good for us as consumers.
[HTC EVO 3D] Sad Panda:
I definitely agree with your backhaul comment, although I don't know what type of connection feeds into the backbone, but I'm sure their is a huge bottle neck problem there, which feeds my point about the cost of equipping a mobile network being so high. Ideally they would use fiber from tower to the equipment that connects the mobile network to the backbone, but I don't know what they are actually using in most cases.

NewZJ: while they are provisioning accounts to throttle data, the same thing is done with home internet too. Cable internet for example has no technical limitation on throughput speed, it is only dependent on the network equipment as to how much bandwidth they have. When a large upgrade is done that increases bandwidth of the network they provision accounts and raise the throughput cap for customers. Bandwidth determines how many customers can run at the same throughput speed simultaneously, and mobile networks work the exact same way. Provision or not if bandwidth provided by the current network equipment is not high enough we can't reach the throughput speed we have been provisioned when there are too many people are using data simultaneously. I'm sorry I'm not trying to be rude but your current idea of how the provisioning works is false. When they provision your account they aren't reserving a spot or specific amount of throughput speed that you are guaranteed to be able to use, it doesn't work that way at all. The only thing the provisioning does is put a MAX speed that your account can utilize, but if there is too much traffic for the network or bandwidth available your throughput speed will never reach that provisioned value. Bandwidth is a finite value, not infinite. If you have 100 people using data at the same time they could be provisioned for 1000kb/s or any other value you care to substitute in, but that doesn't mean those 100 people are reserved 1000kb/s. They get what speed the network equipment can give based on the technical limitations.
[HTC EVO 3D] BrianDigital:
I'd do data caps if I got data rollover
[HTC EVO 3D] NewZJ:
@Sad Panda

i agree, the provisioning won't give each customer their full speed, only a % of the total.

my main focus was to try and explain that everybody gets a share that's equal, so that they would understand that if somebody is torrenting/netflix/youtube/etc they wouldn't be getting a bigger/faster speed but rather that if one person is only getting 10kb/s then everybody is getting 10kb/s too.

the arguement I'm making is only against capping the plans

i believe that breaking the TOS by torrenting hurts everybody and I'm against it. but if people are following the rules and they happen to have high usage they shouldn't be penalized even if it causes the tower to be at max and causes everybody to have slower speeds
[HTC EVO 3D] mingolianbeef:
I agree, because even though I'm having to use my phone to tether internet, the 6 ppl in my house don't use over 4 gigs/ month, I thing there was one month that I used 6, but that's cause I purchased games from gameloft, and the caches were pretty monstrous! Other than that, I just thing that ppls pure greed and lack of consideration for the many others internet kills us, T-Mobile internet was amazing, until they throttled my ass lol, then it sucked, I would rather have slow TRULY unlimited than fast misleading unlimited, because all tmoblie does is mislead ppl, plus, my bill with T-Mobile was almost $400 for 3 ppl, with sprint, its only $180, you get what you pay ffor ppl!
[HTC EVO 3D] xHausx:
You SOB, I was about to pull my hair out when I saw this because I thought you may actually be serious lol
[HTC EVO 3D] Sad Panda:
I couldn't agree more, or put it any better myself and have kept it brief. I think you are completely right, if people would use their share fairly we definitely would see better speeds. It is a shame that people aren't behaving, because there is only so much money sprint has to improve the network, and they are already borrowing a lot to make improvements. I think there are too many of the people that want unlimited data that are also abusing it. That is a shame. Nothing in life is free, and taking advantage of the unlimited plans by abusing them for more than just your mobile needs will end up screwing you in the long run. I don't foresee the unlimited plans staying much longer, as they are ending up affecting the network too much. If poor speeds make too many people cancel their data or leave sprint altogether they end up losing money instead of drawing in people with these plans and making money. Hopefully the network upgrades, specially the 4g rollout will get enough people off 3G that both the 3G and 4g speeds are acceptable again
[HTC EVO 3D] SirThumpaLot:
Whether or not people follow the TOS verbatim, Sprint is going to have their "Unlimited" data plan go the way of the dodo bird regardless.

Why?

Because they can. As someone stated previously, Sprint has a responsibility to their shareholders, just like any other corporation, to maximize profits. One way they accomplish this is by limiting overhead. You can limit overhead by only investing just enough of your profits into infrastructure to get by thus hampering overall user experience.

Now if their top executives were to take a humble salary ($60,000/yr - $80,000) just for a short amount of time (i.e. - 10 yrs or so) They could take whatever profit is made and reinvest it into improving their infrastructure & technology. This would provide a better user experience for us consumers, while keeping our costs down, which will bring more customers due to improved services at affordable pricing. Furthermore, this will also put them ahead in terms of mobile technology.

The problem with this theory is the fact that this would be considered a long term strategy & most folks would rather see their pockets full right from the gate. The irony of it all would be the fact that a long term strategy like this could possibly make a mobile company surpass the competition if executed correctly. As consumers, we would get cutting edge mobile experience at pricing that will undercut other mobile companies while the company & shareholders will have more financial success then they'll know what to do with due to the eventual huge customer base.

While I still have an unlimited plan, I for one am going to use my phone/data how I see fit. I didn't pay $300+ for a phone plus phone/data services so some faceless entity can dictate how I use what I've already paid for. That's absurd. Not to say I'm going to tether and torrent as I'd rather connect to my WiFi. I believe the whole "we're going to rid unlimited data due to people abusing our network" is just propaganda so consumers don't bust out the torches & pitchforks when the inevitable happens.

Just my $0.02