Results 31 to 43 of 43
- 11-28-2006, 01:17 PM #31Bill MarriottGuest
Re: Verizon is worse (Re: Cancelled Sprint)
I find it a little creepy that Verizon knows/tracks how many videos you've
watched on the "open web" and actually itemizes them on your bill, $0 per
video or not. The point is -- as reported by MANY different sources ==
Verizon does NOT want users streaming media content to their phones. They
HAVE terminated accounts for it, their terms of service DOES specifically
prohibit it; and if you're getting away with it, it's either because you're
paying "per-view" for the content, or limiting yourself to whatever free and
pre-approved content is "on-network."
My beef with Verizon is based on the difference between their promotion of
"unlimited" vs. actual policy of "limited;" limiting what you can
legitimately do with the phone (i.e., no Orb); and pricing that is 2.5x what
Sprint charges. You've obviously got some personal grudge with Sprint, fair
or otherwise, which would prevent you from agreeing no matter what.
› See More: Cancelled Sprint
- 11-28-2006, 02:59 PM #32Todd AllcockGuest
Re: Verizon is worse (Re: Cancelled Sprint)
At 28 Nov 2006 14:17:22 -0500 Bill Marriott wrote:
> The point is -- as reported by MANY different sources ==
> Verizon does NOT want users streaming media content to their phones.
They
> HAVE terminated accounts for it, their terms of service DOES
specifically
> prohibit it; and if you're getting away with it, it's either because
you're
> paying "per-view" for the content, or limiting yourself to whatever
free and
> pre-approved content is "on-network."
I disagree- if you're "getting away with it" it's because you are not a
problem in Verizon's eyes.
Seriously, do you think Verizon really cares if you download a YouTube
video once or twice a week? The "prohibited use" terms are there as a
loophole to let them kick out anybody who uses too much bandwidth on a
service advertised as "unlimited."
> My beef with Verizon is based on the difference between their promotion
of
> "unlimited" vs. actual policy of "limited;" limiting what you can
> legitimately do with the phone (i.e., no Orb); and pricing that is 2.5x
what
> Sprint charges.
Verizon, IMHO , is protecting their lucrative "enterprise" business who
pay $79/month for broadband access w/PC cards. They command the highest
prices because they have the fastest speed. More teenagers streaming
videos means less bandwidth for the high-end customers who will not be
happy with less-than-DSL speed.
Sprint is less restrictive in their terms, but they limit you as well-
take tethering, for exAmple. Do you really think they'll take your
$15/month service away if you check your e-mail on a laptop once a month
when you're stuck at a hotel without Wi-fi? No, but they'll use that
condition to leverage you into a "phone as modem" plan if you abuse it.
Either way, I'm happy with T-Mobile's $5/month unlimted data. It's terms
are the easiest to deal with- you can use whatever you're able to- they
put any restrictions they want in place at their server by blocking ports
rather than making a list of prohibitions.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
- 11-28-2006, 03:20 PM #33Thomas T. VeldhouseGuest
Re: Verizon is worse (Re: Cancelled Sprint)
g <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Thomas,
> I know you know what you're doing but now *I'm* confused...
>
> I have a 700P which I use with Sprint service and various applications.
> Among those applications are a web browser and a multi-media player
> (Kinoma). I can point the these applications at anything I care to and
> download streaming content. For example, YouTube works just fine.
> Similarly any web page (modulo the presentation being nice for a small
> screen), web cams, streaming this or that, podcasts etc.
>
> While my Treo does have a builtin Sprint application that points at
> Sprint content, I never use it, as I agree with you it isn't attractive.
>
> When one says "VCAST" or "PowerVision" are we talking about the
> underlying transport -the ISP EVDO service-- or some *content* or other
> which happens to also be available? Doesn't Verizon offer the same
> underlying ISP function as Sprint? If so, why is "free content" an
> issue with either of them?
>
VCAST and PowerVision are analagous. They are the EVDO plans they sell for
phone usage. They are not intended for all out data usage (i.e. tethering a
computer to the phone).
> If we're only talking about underlying transport, isn't total data usage
> an issue?
Both Sprint PCS and Verizon Wireless sell data plans; and indeed, they
recommend dedicated data cards for this service. These plans are more
expensive [as you might expect], but you have more ability to transfer data
without infringing upon the TOS. Even these plans are not meant for data
addicts [like porn slurping].
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
- 11-28-2006, 03:27 PM #34Thomas T. VeldhouseGuest
Re: Verizon is worse (Re: Cancelled Sprint)
Bill Marriott <[email protected]> wrote:
> I find it a little creepy that Verizon knows/tracks how many videos you've
> watched on the "open web" and actually itemizes them on your bill, $0 per
> video or not. The point is -- as reported by MANY different sources ==
> Verizon does NOT want users streaming media content to their phones. They
> HAVE terminated accounts for it, their terms of service DOES specifically
> prohibit it; and if you're getting away with it, it's either because you're
> paying "per-view" for the content, or limiting yourself to whatever free and
> pre-approved content is "on-network."
>
> My beef with Verizon is based on the difference between their promotion of
> "unlimited" vs. actual policy of "limited;" limiting what you can
> legitimately do with the phone (i.e., no Orb); and pricing that is 2.5x what
> Sprint charges. You've obviously got some personal grudge with Sprint, fair
> or otherwise, which would prevent you from agreeing no matter what.
>
What I am disagreeing with has nothing to do with Sprint or Verizon. EVDO is
not meant for unlimitted download [or upload]. It is meant to give broadband
performance to remote computing, but not for porn, warez or movie slurping, as
an example. The technology simply can't handle it and it should be no
surprise to anybody that the limitations of the TOS apply to this scenario.
YOu simply can not expect something for nothing, which is what is being asked
for here.
As far as your occassional connection to YouTube or any other site, both
Verizon and Sprint are known to ignore this if there is no "abuse" going on.
If you are worried about it, then you are probably abusing ... so get a real
data plan.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
- 11-28-2006, 07:33 PM #35Bill MarriottGuest
Re: Verizon is worse (Re: Cancelled Sprint)
You keep mentioning "porn slurping" and it's a little off-putting. One
doesn't have to be surfing porn to want to use their phone to its utmost.
You completely ignored my list of activities *specifically* prohibited by
the Verizon agreement.
One of my favorites is being able to use Orb. On a recent trip I was able to
watch The Tonight Show with Jay Leno while waiting for a flight at the
airport. That use is specifically and unambiguously prohibited by Verizon.
Another thing I do quite often is to log in remotely to my desktop PC with
EzRemote remote desktop software. Among other things, it lets me use the
actual Internet Explorer browser to access my bank. To my knowledge, no
phone/smartphone/pda browser is compatible with my bank's authentication
scheme. That use is again specifically and unambiguously prohibited by
Verizon.
From time-to-time I transfer files to my 700p using Avvenue. It could be a
spreadsheet or an MP3. A use not allowed by Verizon.
The performance is top-notch. So it does not appear that Sprint's
consumer-friendly policies have negatively impacted their quality of
service.
I understand what you're saying about Verizon "ignoring" it if it's not
significant use. However the KEY difference is that Sprint has no language
against these activities in its TOS, and Verizon does. Verizon *has*
enforced its regulations. You've provided no evidence that Sprint does
anything similar.
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Bill Marriott <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I find it a little creepy that Verizon knows/tracks how many videos
>> you've
>> watched on the "open web" and actually itemizes them on your bill, $0 per
>> video or not. The point is -- as reported by MANY different sources ==
>> Verizon does NOT want users streaming media content to their phones. They
>> HAVE terminated accounts for it, their terms of service DOES specifically
>> prohibit it; and if you're getting away with it, it's either because
>> you're
>> paying "per-view" for the content, or limiting yourself to whatever free
>> and
>> pre-approved content is "on-network."
>>
>> My beef with Verizon is based on the difference between their promotion
>> of
>> "unlimited" vs. actual policy of "limited;" limiting what you can
>> legitimately do with the phone (i.e., no Orb); and pricing that is 2.5x
>> what
>> Sprint charges. You've obviously got some personal grudge with Sprint,
>> fair
>> or otherwise, which would prevent you from agreeing no matter what.
>>
>
> What I am disagreeing with has nothing to do with Sprint or Verizon. EVDO
> is
> not meant for unlimitted download [or upload]. It is meant to give
> broadband
> performance to remote computing, but not for porn, warez or movie
> slurping, as
> an example. The technology simply can't handle it and it should be no
> surprise to anybody that the limitations of the TOS apply to this
> scenario.
> YOu simply can not expect something for nothing, which is what is being
> asked
> for here.
>
> As far as your occassional connection to YouTube or any other site, both
> Verizon and Sprint are known to ignore this if there is no "abuse" going
> on.
> If you are worried about it, then you are probably abusing ... so get a
> real
> data plan.
>
> --
> Thomas T. Veldhouse
> Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
>
>
- 11-29-2006, 08:39 AM #36Thomas T. VeldhouseGuest
Re: Verizon is worse (Re: Cancelled Sprint)
Bill Marriott <[email protected]> wrote:
> You keep mentioning "porn slurping" and it's a little off-putting. One
> doesn't have to be surfing porn to want to use their phone to its utmost.
>
> You completely ignored my list of activities *specifically* prohibited by
> the Verizon agreement.
>
> One of my favorites is being able to use Orb. On a recent trip I was able to
> watch The Tonight Show with Jay Leno while waiting for a flight at the
> airport. That use is specifically and unambiguously prohibited by Verizon.
>
> Another thing I do quite often is to log in remotely to my desktop PC with
> EzRemote remote desktop software. Among other things, it lets me use the
> actual Internet Explorer browser to access my bank. To my knowledge, no
> phone/smartphone/pda browser is compatible with my bank's authentication
> scheme. That use is again specifically and unambiguously prohibited by
> Verizon.
>
> From time-to-time I transfer files to my 700p using Avvenue. It could be a
> spreadsheet or an MP3. A use not allowed by Verizon.
>
> The performance is top-notch. So it does not appear that Sprint's
> consumer-friendly policies have negatively impacted their quality of
> service.
>
> I understand what you're saying about Verizon "ignoring" it if it's not
> significant use. However the KEY difference is that Sprint has no language
> against these activities in its TOS, and Verizon does. Verizon *has*
> enforced its regulations. You've provided no evidence that Sprint does
> anything similar.
>
Sprint has and most certainly will continue to take action against abusers. I
doubt highly that Sprint cares about any specific use, but instead, just cares
about overall bandwidth consumed. If you use too much ... expect a hand
slapping.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
- 11-29-2006, 08:54 AM #37TinmanGuest
Re: Verizon is worse (Re: Cancelled Sprint)
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Bill Marriott <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I understand what you're saying about Verizon "ignoring" it if it's not
>> significant use. However the KEY difference is that Sprint has no
>> language
>> against these activities in its TOS, and Verizon does. Verizon *has*
>> enforced its regulations. You've provided no evidence that Sprint does
>> anything similar.
>>
>
> Sprint has and most certainly will continue to take action against
> abusers. I
> doubt highly that Sprint cares about any specific use, but instead, just
> cares
> about overall bandwidth consumed. If you use too much ... expect a hand
Besides ignoring most of Bill's key points, you have an interesting
definition for "evidence."
Sprint has better pricing for data, and is less restrictive than Verizon.
End of story.
All this talk about what EV-DO can't do doesn't matter to the people
actually using it--and "porn slurpers" aren't likely to be using it anyway.
--
Mike
- 11-29-2006, 12:02 PM #38Thomas T. VeldhouseGuest
Re: Verizon is worse (Re: Cancelled Sprint)
Tinman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Besides ignoring most of Bill's key points, you have an interesting
> definition for "evidence."
>
Evidence is all over this group. They have nabbed fools for tethering since
Vision was first released. I am not a monkey doing Google for the guy ... he
can do it himself.
> Sprint has better pricing for data, and is less restrictive than Verizon.
> End of story.
>
Yes they do. Verizon has been offering more bandwidth to its users. End of
story (for now).
> All this talk about what EV-DO can't do doesn't matter to the people
> actually using it--and "porn slurpers" aren't likely to be using it anyway.
>
My point was and is that EV-DO is not meant for large scale bandwidth hogs.
So, if you bring the wrath of Verizon down on your for your usage, the odds
are good that the same usage will bring the wrath of Sprint down on your too.
Whether a given application is specifically prohibitted or not.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
- 11-29-2006, 01:01 PM #39Bill MarriottGuest
Re: Verizon is worse (Re: Cancelled Sprint)
Tethering is a completely different issue, and Sprint is very up-front about
it. Read up on "red herring." There is no evidence of Sprint contracts being
terminated for non-tethering use.
I also don't see where you can prove that Verizon offers "more bandwidth"
for its users. In fact there are multiple websites that have proven that
Verizon has intentionally *limits* bandwidth via side-by-side videos of live
tests. Plus, Verizon specifically claims the right to do so in their TOS:
"We reserve right to limit throughput..." Again, a provision conspicuously
NOT found in the Sprint TOS.
A couple weeks after I first got my Sprint Treo 700p, I walked into a
Verizon store and did a speed test right there. Both units had full bars.
Neither was roaming. My Sprint Treo 700p kicked the butt of the Verizon
700p. 386Kbps to 234Kbps. (The speed test, since it was not web browsing,
email, or intranet access was actually prohibited under Verizon's terms of
service.)
Although you keep changing the subject, you're quickly losing any
credibility when you keep pulling these so-called "facts" out of your butt.
Maybe you should actually use Google to back yourself up once.
InfoWorld
http://weblog.infoworld.com/gripelin...n_sneakwr.html
Consumer Affairs
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news0...unlimited.html
Washington Post
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thech...th_bandit.html
Let's not forget to mention that Sprint has a wider EVDO coverage area, is
rolling out Rev A EVDO sooner than Verizon, and has on average higher
throughput than Verizon on its network. I'll let you Google those facts
yourself. Try the terms "Verizon cripple" to see how they screw consumers
over in more ways than just broadband access.
Excerpt from a Verizon letter to a customer of its "Unlimited" plan:
"As you know, the terms and conditions that govern your NationalAccess
and/or BroadbandAccess account, which were provided to you at the time of
service activation and which are posted on VerizonWireless.com, only permit
Internet browsing, email and intranet access. All other activities, such as
streaming and/or downloading movies and video, are expressly prohibited by
the terms and conditions. A copy of the terms and conditions is enclosed."
Enjoy your Verizon service... until you get it taken away.
- 11-29-2006, 03:44 PM #40Thomas T. VeldhouseGuest
Re: Verizon is worse (Re: Cancelled Sprint)
Bill Marriott <[email protected]> wrote:
> Tethering is a completely different issue, and Sprint is very up-front about
> it. Read up on "red herring." There is no evidence of Sprint contracts being
> terminated for non-tethering use.
>
> I also don't see where you can prove that Verizon offers "more bandwidth"
> for its users. In fact there are multiple websites that have proven that
> Verizon has intentionally *limits* bandwidth via side-by-side videos of live
> tests. Plus, Verizon specifically claims the right to do so in their TOS:
> "We reserve right to limit throughput..." Again, a provision conspicuously
> NOT found in the Sprint TOS.
>
Just going off of reports I have read about. Chalk it up to my imagination if
you like, I don't really care. In fact, I am sure that it would be easy to
google up reports for both of them have more bandwidth than the other, based
upon timeframe and location (meaning at any give time and place one was faster
than the other).
> Enjoy your Verizon service... until you get it taken away.
>
I will and I won't. I use a VX8300 and watch very little video on my phone,
preferring to talk on it more than look at it. All the video is sanctioned
and within the TOS (explicitly).
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
- 11-30-2006, 10:51 AM #41Isaiah BeardGuest
Re: Verizon is worse (Re: Cancelled Sprint)
Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>> "Unlimited NationalAccess/BroadbandAccess services cannot be used (1) for
>> uploading, downloading or streaming of movies, music or games, (2) with
>> server devices or with host computer applications, including, but not
>> limited to, Web camera posts or broadcasts, automatic data feeds, Voice over
>> IP (VoIP), automated machine-to-machine connections, or peer-to-peer (P2P)
>> file sharing, or (3) as a substitute or backup for private lines or
>> dedicated data connections... We reserve right to limit throughput or amount
>> of data transferred, deny or terminate service, without notice, to anyone we
>> believe is using NationalAccess or BroadbandAccess in any manner prohibited
>> above or whose usage adversely impacts our network or service levels."
>>
>> Verizon will never get my business.
>>
>
> If that is what you are looking for .... I am sure they don't want your
> business. EVDO is not a broadband solution for the above ... it could only
> support a few users.
Yet somehow, Sprint doesn't have these restrictions and permits pretty
much everything but P2P. They even sell their own EVDO-to-Wireless-G
router. And they don't seem to be suffering much for it.
--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
- 11-30-2006, 10:55 AM #42Isaiah BeardGuest
Re: Verizon is worse (Re: Cancelled Sprint)
Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>> I completely agree with you that it's not going to happen with the
>> existing approach. Still it's fun to speculate...
>>
>
> My point is that if you are porn slurping or stealing movies, you should not
> consider wireless as your source of bandwidth
Tom, you assume that everyone complaining about Verizon's draconian
policy is a porn slurper or a movie pirate. I personally take offense
to that as I am neither, and yet don't fit the description of a good
little Verizon customer. One needs only to hang out in evdoforums.com
to see plenty of instances where VZW has terminated people for uses that
are quite legitimate, but "excessive" in VZW's view.
--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
- 11-30-2006, 12:27 PM #43Bill MarriottGuest
Re: Verizon is worse (Re: Cancelled Sprint)
Excellent point.
http://www.evdoforums.com/thread2366.html
See if you can find a thread like that for Sprint. (You can't.)
"Isaiah Beard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>
>>> I completely agree with you that it's not going to happen with the
>>> existing approach. Still it's fun to speculate...
>>>
>>
>> My point is that if you are porn slurping or stealing movies, you should
>> not
>> consider wireless as your source of bandwidth
>
> Tom, you assume that everyone complaining about Verizon's draconian policy
> is a porn slurper or a movie pirate. I personally take offense to that as
> I am neither, and yet don't fit the description of a good little Verizon
> customer. One needs only to hang out in evdoforums.com to see plenty of
> instances where VZW has terminated people for uses that are quite
> legitimate, but "excessive" in VZW's view.
>
> --
> E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
> Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Similar Threads
- Sprint PCS
- Sprint PCS
- Sprint PCS
- Sprint PCS
- Sprint PCS
How to Network Unlock Your Samsung Galaxy S24 from Claro
in Samsung