Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 43 of 43
  1. #31
    Bill Marriott
    Guest

    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




  2. #32
    Todd Allcock
    Guest

    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




  3. #33
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    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





  4. #34
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    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





  5. #35
    Bill Marriott
    Guest

    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
    >
    >






  6. #36
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    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





  7. #37
    Tinman
    Guest

    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





  8. #38
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    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





  9. #39
    Bill Marriott
    Guest

    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.





  10. #40
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    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. #41
    Isaiah Beard
    Guest

    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.



  12. #42
    Isaiah Beard
    Guest

    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.



  13. #43
    Bill Marriott
    Guest

    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




  • Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123