Use PCS for internect connection via laptop???

In article <rmarkoff-8F730A.06183722042004
@news04.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
>=20
> Because as you said:
>=20
> "We don't prohibit that usage"
>=20
> It was discussed at length in this thread. The secret is that its not=20
> enforced till you get to a SECRET level (which is a 2nd secret)..
>=20

So do the Terms&Conditions say that. They don't say you can't. They=20
say the unlimited packs don't cover it. They don't.

And they're not a secret. The limit is "none." SPCS is, right now,=20
prioritizing. Like when you drive 5 over the speed limit on a road. =20
You may be able to continue right on past a police car that way, but=20
that doesn't mean you're not breaking the law.

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

---

› See More: Use PCS for internect connection via laptop???

In article <[email protected]>,
O/Siris <0siris@sprîntpcs.com> wrote:

In article <[email protected]>,
O/Siris <[email protected]> wrote:

> n article <rmarkoff-F58461.05380821042004
> @news02.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
> > Another secret SprintPCS policy.
> >
> >
>
> How is something posted in the Terms & Conditions a secret?


>> Because as you said:

>> "We don't prohibit that usage"

It was discussed at length in this thread. The secret is that its not
enforced till you get to a SECRET level (which is a 2nd secret)..

BUT YOU KNOW THAT ALREADY, you posted it:

=====================

From: O/Siris ([email protected])
Subject: Re: Vision plan as a modem.
Date: 2003-11-16 11:06:19 PST



The PCS Connection Manager software remains on the web site because,
technically, we don't prohibit that usage. All we've done is stop
covering it. No tech support, and no "package" to cover its usage.


============================
> >
>
> So do the Terms&Conditions say that. They don't say you can't. They
> say the unlimited packs don't cover it. They don't.
>
> And they're not a secret. The limit is "none." SPCS is, right now,
> prioritizing. Like when you drive 5 over the speed limit on a road.
> You may be able to continue right on past a police car that way, but
> that doesn't mean you're not breaking the law.



Well now you (as often happens) have contradicted yourself.

OK, play word games, the SECRET is what the priority is, OK?

In article <rmarkoff-F5C8B8.05040723042004
@news04.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
> It was discussed at length in this thread. The secret is that its not=20
> enforced till you get to a SECRET level (which is a 2nd secret)..
>=20

That's no secret, Phil. That's simply a result of the current=20
priorities of those carrying out enforcement. Just as with the 5-
mile over example you've been given, someone has deemed it not a=20
priority. It's still all against the Terms & Conditions. Call and=20
ask, and you'll be told as much.

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:

> "Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:
> >
> > > But your complaint is like driving 5-10 MpH over the speed limit.
> > > Everyone does it, the police usualy don't enforce it too much with
> > > that, but they CAN stop you and write you a ticket for it.
> >
> > You may be right there, but everyone assumes its 10 mph, and the valid
> > reason for that is the imprecision of car speedometers.
> >
>
> But the police can still write you a ticket if you're doing 1 MpH over
> the limit.

They don't because they won't get a conviction if its contested as their
equipment isn't that precise.


>
> > >
> > > Honestly, I do not know what 'flags' your account for them to look
> > > into it for abuse, if it's a % of talk vs. data, or if it's a flat out
> > > KB thresh hold, average KB usage per day, amount of data transferred
> > > in one session, but something is there. I haven't seen a huge outcry
> > > in my stores over this, so I don't think it's anything that most
> > > casual users would get hit on (occasional email, little browsing
> > > etc..).
> >
> > Most casual users don't user their phone as a modem.
> >
>
> I'm talking about casual data users, the people who use it to just
> check email while on the road etc..


A tiny minority of SprintPCS users

>
> > >
> > > I honestly think they're mainly going after the abusers with this,
> >
> > I think you are 100% right, but they encourage abuse by having the
> > wink-wink policy of never going after casual users.
> >
> >
> Because the casual users are most likely causing as much congestion on
> the data stream as the people accessing the web though their phones,
> thus not creating a huge issue, but when people start downloading
> gigabytes on a month, then that's a bit more. I've seen numbers of
> users, and these people tell me what they do (connect to a laptop, use
> the SPrint PDA phone, use the Sprint phone) and trust me, even people
> who think they're heavy users don't use that much.


Fine, where is the dividing line? It's a SECRET.


>
>
> >
> > > the
> > > people running FTP servers over the PCS connection, constantly running
> > > streaming video / music, etc. It is killing the bandwidth and is
> > > rather unfair to the people who get the correct equipment and plans
> > > (the PCMCIA cards & data only plans) that are getting cheated out with
> > > this (like voice, there is a limit to the data stream over the
> > > network).
> > >
> > > If you really want to have the wireless internet connection, and will
> > > be a heave user of it, just get the card and data only plan and you'll
> > > have nohting to worry about.
> >
> >
> > But then we agree that
> >
> > - the TOS policy is not always enforced
> >
> True, they're going after the people who are abusing it and
> exponentially increasing the data traffic. Casual users use about the
> same, or less, then most people (who use the data services regularly)
> who use their phones the legal way.
>
> > - The fact that its not enforced is a secret
> >
> You can rob a store, and if you have a clean record, you'll most
> likely get slapped on the wrist. What about a second? Third? How
> many literal get out of jail free cards will the judge hand you? That
> isn't open.
>
> People have done it and nothing is said, I think that's enough to say
> that it isn't as enforced as they'd like it to be, and if they didn't
> put up this disclaimer in the ToS, then there would be a lot more
> abuse.

***You only encourage abuse by not enforcing a policy. If you can't or
won't enforce a policy, don't have it.****

Or have a policy that says For $5 a month you can use your phone a modem
for upto 100 Meg a month. That way nothing changes except more money for
SprintPCS and eliminating a policy thats not enforced.

Or is the truth that you can't easily track data useage, and action is
only taken when a network gets congested???


>
>
> > - The break point where it is enforced is a secret
> >
> Because it's still variable. It's not just total kilobytes of
> downloads, it's talk vs. data ratio, it's session lengths, it's total
> KB per session, it's the account itself, it's how much is being
> reuqested in each session.
>
>
> >
> > And I am not complaining, just stating the situation, which apparently
> > we agree on.
> >
> > I have **NEVER** used a phone as a modem, but do agree some folks have a
> > leg to stand on when they complain that Sprint on the one hand will sell
> > a connection kit, and then say you can't use it.
>
> Sprint only sold the kits for a month or two, and then were asked not
> to sell them and return them to the warehouse, PLUS, those kits were
> for syncing your phonebook etc, NOT for connecting them to the web
> (I'm not talking about the 2G web connection kits, either). Sprint
> *never* promoted this with

SORRY - maybe you didn't but we've had ample posts from people who said
thats exactly what was done, and long after your 2 month period.


From: MacGuy ([email protected])
Original FormatNewsgroups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs
Date: 2003-02-11 17:30:14 PST

But the new vision TOS was released (14 days?) AFTER the unlimited
vision plans. Sprint continued to market the kits for a while after
that.

Originally sprint sold vision and the connection kits as part of their
new wireless roll out. They promoted the use of a phone with the laptop
connection. I signed up and bought the new phone and the kit. The
Sprint store had sold me on the fact I could connect up my laptop.



>the only exception being the PCMCIA cards.
>
> Also,
>
> This enforcement does NOT include the people on data only plans with
> the PCMCIA cards, nor does it include the 2G wireless web connection
> kits.

In article <[email protected]>,
O/Siris <0siris@sprîntpcs.com> wrote:

> In article <rmarkoff-8F730A.06183722042004
> @news04.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
> >
> > Because as you said:
> >
> > "We don't prohibit that usage"
> >
> > It was discussed at length in this thread. The secret is that its not
> > enforced till you get to a SECRET level (which is a 2nd secret)..
> >
>
> So do the Terms&Conditions say that. They don't say you can't. They
> say the unlimited packs don't cover it. They don't.
>
> And they're not a secret. The limit is "none." SPCS is, right now,
> prioritizing. Like when you drive 5 over the speed limit on a road.
> You may be able to continue right on past a police car that way, but
> that doesn't mean you're not breaking the law.

It apparently is like SprintPCS not being able to track useage.

Speedometers are not so precise, and radar detectors are not precise
enough that contested speed tickets for small amounts are usually thrown
out of court. However there are numerous small towns in need of revenue
that will issue a ticket for 2 mph over a posted limit. Perhaps you may
have heard of the term applied in such cases. SPEED TRAP.

http://www.speedtrap.org/ticket/time_over_distance.html





***SprintPCS is only encourageing the "abuse" it says it is concerned
about by not enforcing its own rules. If you can't or won't enforce a
rule, don't have it****

In article <[email protected]>,
"Donkey Agony" <root@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:

> Lawrence Glasser wrote:
>
> >> We all know that SprintPCS tacitly permits low volume data use on
> >> voice plans, contrary to the stated ToS.
>
> > And for that, we thank them!
>
> Indeed we do.

And its a secret the point at which they may come after you.

In article <[email protected]>,
O/Siris <0siris@sprîntpcs.com> wrote:

> In article <rmarkoff-F5C8B8.05040723042004
> @news04.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
> > It was discussed at length in this thread. The secret is that its not
> > enforced till you get to a SECRET level (which is a 2nd secret)..
> >
>
> That's no secret, Phil. That's simply a result of the current
> priorities of those carrying out enforcement.

Nice try.

If you won't enforce a policy, why have it? It only encourages abuse.

"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> O/Siris <0siris@sprîntpcs.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <rmarkoff-F5C8B8.05040723042004
> > @news04.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
> > > It was discussed at length in this thread. The secret is that its not
> > > enforced till you get to a SECRET level (which is a 2nd secret)..
> > >
> >
> > That's no secret, Phil. That's simply a result of the current
> > priorities of those carrying out enforcement.
>
> Nice try.
>
> If you won't enforce a policy, why have it? It only encourages abuse.


Since you're always bragging that Sprint PCS is losing money, then
where shall they get the manpower to enforce it 100% without raising
costs?

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (TechGeek) wrote:

> "Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > O/Siris <0siris@sprîntpcs.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <rmarkoff-F5C8B8.05040723042004
> > > @news04.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
> > > > It was discussed at length in this thread. The secret is that its not
> > > > enforced till you get to a SECRET level (which is a 2nd secret)..
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's no secret, Phil. That's simply a result of the current
> > > priorities of those carrying out enforcement.
> >
> > Nice try.
> >
> > If you won't enforce a policy, why have it? It only encourages abuse.
>
>
> Since you're always bragging that Sprint PCS is losing money, then
> where shall they get the manpower to enforce it 100% without raising
> costs?


Looks like I'm suggested they need to have a different policy.

"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> O/Siris <0siris@sprîntpcs.com> wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]>,
> O/Siris <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > n article <rmarkoff-F58461.05380821042004
> > @news02.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
> > > Another secret SprintPCS policy.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > How is something posted in the Terms & Conditions a secret?
>
>
> >> Because as you said:
>
> >> "We don't prohibit that usage"
>
> It was discussed at length in this thread. The secret is that its not
> enforced till you get to a SECRET level (which is a 2nd secret)..
>

And how is that different from the broadband ISP's that are shutting people
down for using more than an acceptable amount of bandwidth in a month, but
never stating what the threshold is?

"TechGeek" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> "Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > If you won't enforce a policy, why have it? It only encourages abuse.
>
>
> Since you're always bragging that Sprint PCS is losing money, then
> where shall they get the manpower to enforce it 100% without raising
> costs?

Enforcement could be done through an automated computer billing program,
no manpower required. I think the reason SprintPCS doesn't enforce
the prohibition against moderate data usage is because they know it would
cause a lot of customers to switch to T-Mobile. I know I would.

--

John Richards

"Robert M." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> > >
> >
> > But the police can still write you a ticket if you're doing 1 MpH over
> > the limit.
>
> They don't because they won't get a conviction if its contested as their
> equipment isn't that precise.
>

Wether or not it can get contested is irrelevant, they can still write
you a ticket.
>

> > >
> > Because the casual users are most likely causing as much congestion on
> > the data stream as the people accessing the web though their phones,
> > thus not creating a huge issue, but when people start downloading
> > gigabytes on a month, then that's a bit more. I've seen numbers of
> > users, and these people tell me what they do (connect to a laptop, use
> > the SPrint PDA phone, use the Sprint phone) and trust me, even people
> > who think they're heavy users don't use that much.
>
>
> Fine, where is the dividing line? It's a SECRET.
>
Like I said, it's not just one dividing line. They look at total KB
downloaded, they look at voice vs. data usage, they look at session
lengths, they look at amount of data transferred per session etc..

Announcing what 'crossing the line' would be would only encourage the
people to go up to that limit then stop, thus creating more of an
issue.

It's against the ToS, plain and simple, you hook it up and download
one KB, then you've violated the ToS.

>
> ***You only encourage abuse by not enforcing a policy. If you can't or
> won't enforce a policy, don't have it.****
>

Isn't that what Sprint is doing now? You're always complaining /
bragging that Sprint is losing money, well, to get the manpower to
enforce this 100% would cost a lot, so then you wouldn't be able to
complain about this, but you'd complain about them losing more money.

Choose a side, enforcement or saving money?

> Or have a policy that says For $5 a month you can use your phone a modem
> for upto 100 Meg a month. That way nothing changes except more money for
> SprintPCS and eliminating a policy thats not enforced.
>
I won't deny that that is not a bad idea, but the 'abusers' are mostly
breaking that 100MB / Month limit by a long shot (just see my next
statement).


> Or is the truth that you can't easily track data useage, and action is
> only taken when a network gets congested???
>
>
Data can easily be tracked. I had a guy come in the other day, the
guy had well over 1.5 GB (yes, GIGABYTES) of data usage, he didn't
have to tell me that he was using his phone as a modem for his laptop
(which he did tell me later when I told him I had no issues connecting
to the web with the phone).

People who use it just to check email etc. are probably using as much
of the data stream as people who only use the web over the phone, even
though that's against the ToS, it's not creating an issue on the
network. The guy above, is creating an issue, there is no way that
you can have that much data usage just by going though the phone. (And
yes, several of us have done extensive testing to find out how much
data is used when, we use the PCMCIA card to do a day of streaming
music, or video, we spend a day on IM with one of the phones, we use a
PDA to check the stocks on CNN.com every 30 minutes). We're probabaly
done more testing than out training departments and we're about to
release our findings to corp. We can tell, just by the limted access
to billing that we have (we do not have the same access that the
investigators do) we can tell who's connecting to a laptop and who's
using their phone.


>> >
> > Sprint only sold the kits for a month or two, and then were asked not
> > to sell them and return them to the warehouse, PLUS, those kits were
> > for syncing your phonebook etc, NOT for connecting them to the web
> > (I'm not talking about the 2G web connection kits, either). Sprint
> > *never* promoted this with
>
> SORRY - maybe you didn't but we've had ample posts from people who said
> thats exactly what was done, and long after your 2 month period.
>
>
> From: MacGuy ([email protected])
> Original FormatNewsgroups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs
> Date: 2003-02-11 17:30:14 PST
>
> But the new vision TOS was released (14 days?) AFTER the unlimited
> vision plans. Sprint continued to market the kits for a while after
> that.
>
> Originally sprint sold vision and the connection kits as part of their
> new wireless roll out. They promoted the use of a phone with the laptop
> connection. I signed up and bought the new phone and the kit. The
> Sprint store had sold me on the fact I could connect up my laptop.
>
>

There is no telling when this person is talking about, just when they
posted. There was a communication less than a few months that Vision
launched for us to STOP selling the data kits due to large issues with
abuse. We were instructed to take them off the floor and promptly
return them to the warehouse.

If SPRINT sales people were promoting this, then they should have been
fired, and if they were caught by an auitor, they were fired (and I
knew a couple who did get fired). Even managers got demoted over this
because they continued to sell them.

I got in trouble with my own manager for pulling the kits off the wall
and refusing to sell them (I even locked them up so no one else could
take them out until I returned them). He got the district manager
involved, yes I was in deep you-know-what until my area VP stepped in
and said I was doing exactly what I was supposed to be doing. Guess
who ended up in the hot seat after that? Not me.

In article <rmarkoff-E7A993.05583823042004
@news04.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
>=20
> Nice try.
>=20
> If you won't enforce a policy, why have it? It only encourages abuse.
>=20

Nobody said we don't. Quite opposite, in fact. We *do* enforce it. =20
Just as with anything else, though, the severity of the offense=20
determines the attention the violation gets. Right now, the priority=20
is the big users. When that is handled, the focus will shift. Just=20
as happens in law enforcement. Light users are under the proverbial=20
radar right now.

That does *not* mean it's not being enforced.

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

In article <rmarkoff-FCF50E.05200423042004
@news04.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
> It apparently is like SprintPCS not being able to track useage.
>=20
>=20

Another conclusion leapt to from the forum's least credible "expert."

--=20
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for Sprint PCS
I *don't* speak for them

O/Siris wrote:
>
> In article <rmarkoff-E7A993.05583823042004
> @news04.east.earthlink.net>, [email protected] says...
> >
> > Nice try.
> >
> > If you won't enforce a policy, why have it? It only encourages abuse.
> >
>
> Nobody said we don't. Quite opposite, in fact. We *do* enforce it.
> Just as with anything else, though, the severity of the offense
> determines the attention the violation gets. Right now, the priority
> is the big users. When that is handled, the focus will shift. Just
> as happens in law enforcement. Light users are under the proverbial
> radar right now.

I'm not clear as to why the concept is so difficult to understand.

The speed limit is 65mph. If you go over, the police have the right
to cite you. A little over, maybe a warning, but, then again, maybe
a full-blown ticket. Way over, see you in court.

Larry