What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
48 Comments
- fandyllic, on 03/02/2009, -2/+19The U.S. is an embarrassment around the world for the level of internet and broadband access it provides in proportion to the wealth of its consumers.
I bought an iPod touch over an iPhone for the exact reason of avoiding AT&T and its untetherable, crappy data plan. Besides, AT&T has crappy coverage compared to Verizon where I live and go. I know quite a few people who love their iPhones, but they are meh at best for AT&T. AT&T should realize that the iPhone is their golden goose and capture as many customers as they can now that it is in a innovation leadership position. When the iPhone falls back in the pack, AT&T will have very little to offer people to switch.
All that said about AT&T, the other major carriers have several faults of their own. Sprint's voice and data coverage is mediocre at best and they have shown almost no innovation. Verizon has horrendous hidden usage caps on its "unlimited" data services and is known for cutting people off without any warning. - LANjackal, on 03/02/2009, -0/+15As a former AT&T subscriber, I can attest that their 1st priority is nickel-and-diming the crap out of their users. Your bill is almost never predictable because AT&T always finds something to charge you for that's not covered under your current plan. My bill is almost a 100% predictable under Verizon, but if it weren't for a 20% corporate discount, I'd be paying $30/mth more than I did under AT&T.
The reason there's no AYCE omniplan offered by US carriers is because of the tremendous level of lock-in present in the industry. Cellphone number portability doesn't change the fact that switching carriers probably means switching phones, which means paying full price for an expensive handset if you don't want to be in a contract. Did I mention the learning curve involved in using the new phone? Switching from 8+ years of Nokia to a Verizon Samsung was a process I don't really want to repeat. Despite improvements, ETF policies are still a minefield.
Once users are locked in, or at least strongly discouraged from leaving, carriers are free to abuse them as they wish. This includes charging for SMS messaging that's essentially free to provide. Most carriers end up doing 1 of 3 things:
1) Offer "low cost" plans, but nickel-and-dime users (AT&T)
2) Offer expensive "unlimited" plans which are essentially just really large walled gardens (Verizon)
3) Toss service out the window (Sprint)
4) Offer a variety of confusing options that wind up being like one of the above anyway (T-Mobile) - atomicpoet, on 03/01/2009, -0/+15The telcos are going to have to wake-up and smell the coffee one of these days.
- binaryloop, on 03/02/2009, -0/+14I couldn't agree more. I've been comparing the G1 and the iPhone and both would put me on the hook for $65-75 a month for the next two years. I used to use the MediaNET service from AT&T and I loved it! You were able to log into the website and switch plans at any time. If I found that I wasn't using that much I could switch to the $4.99/mo. plan. Then, when I traveled, or needed more data, I could switch to the $20/mo. unlimited plan. Then, I could switch back to the lower rate. Very simple. Very nice.
I won't buy a next-gen phone until they sort this out. I refuse to get roped into a 2 year contract and pay (exorbitant amounts) for data that I might not even use. - lordmike, on 03/02/2009, -0/+9'cos they are an oligopoly, that's why... They can charge whatever they want, and what are you going to do? Go to another carrier? They'll just charge the same! The Telco trust is the biggest cartel since OPEC and the biggest violator of the Sherman Antitrust act since Standard oil, yet no one has the balls in Washington to do anything about it...
- angusm, on 03/02/2009, -1/+10I look forward to seeing the mobile phone model extended to other market sectors as well. Want that new Lexus? You can have it for 50% off, but we get to tell you which roads you can drive it on and which filling stations you're allowed to use. Oh, and there are some places you won't be able to drive it at all. And even if you buy a different car, you're locked into buying gas at our prices for the next two years (by which time we hope to have made up the cost of letting you have it for half-off several times over).
- Khast, on 03/02/2009, -1/+9We have worse cellular plans than most 1st world countries. And our broadband speeds is so 1990s compared to the same countries.
The reason that the US lags is because the telecoms refusal to upgrade the infrastructure (even when the government gave them money to use towards upgrading.) We have maxed out the current outdated infrastructure, which makes it difficult to add new features and speed comparable to other countries. - clickwir, on 03/02/2009, -1/+9SMS should be free. I won't even attempt to use it until it is. Data plans are so expensive it's stupid. Sure the cell tower infrastructure has it's costs, but the actual bandwidth to the internet is pennies.
- inactive, on 03/02/2009, -0/+7Your complaining about the US cellcos' you should see the Monopoly and pandering that goes on in Canada None the less I see the point
- MacEnvy, on 03/02/2009, -1/+7I guess they should have used all of that investment money we gave them to, you know, invest in stuff. Instead, they lined their pockets. Too bad for them - someone will get it right soon, and they might just be left behind.
- Elsewhere42, on 03/02/2009, -2/+8The Cell Carriers know that once VoIP takes off they will be screwed.
VoIP = No need for a cell carrier. - MacEnvy, on 03/02/2009, -1/+7iPods don't use data plans, my confused friend.
- Phillycat81, on 03/02/2009, -0/+6That's why they can pry my original SERO plan from my cold dead hands.
...or when sprint goes belly up... - AmazingSteve, on 03/02/2009, -1/+7The Telcos are in a horrible spot for them right now. They've pretty much hit and surpassed the maximum price that the market will bear, and even that's debatable. Now they're facing new features and techs that people are demanding and they're going to have to provide them eventually, but they can't figure out how to squeeze yet more out of the consumer to protect and increase their obscene profits. Tough *****. Evolve or die. Christ Orange in europe is fighting tooth and nail to have VOIP removed from the new Nokia handset or they'll refuse to carry it.
- jgzman, on 03/02/2009, -0/+6A) People not willing to pay what the telecos want to charge. Note that I didn't say 'fair price,' I said what they want to charge.
B) Entry cost into industry incredibly high. - Rothbardosaurus, on 03/02/2009, -2/+7Perhaps the US isn't as wealthy as you think. Biggest debtor nation.
- dafragsta, on 03/02/2009, -0/+5You mean "Wake up and smell the agnostic digital data paradigm." It still kills me that someone with an AYCE data plan still has to pay $.10 for a ***** text message that is considerably less than 1KB. The packet overhead is probably more than the actual message.
- Manther, on 03/02/2009, -0/+5Not as long as the government is on their side....
- endus, on 03/02/2009, -0/+4I agree with the point of the article. I have a treo which I do not have a data plan for (apparently in some circles this is considered so insane that I am almost eligible for non-voluntary commitment to a mental institution) because of the absolutely ridiculous cost of it. $40/month to ***** around on the internet while I'm taking a ***** at work? Not quite.
However, what the hell is this sentence: "It would be nice to think that carriers will solve the problem by decoupling between how much strain usage actually places on the system and how much is being charged to the customer". Am I reading this wrong, or does that not make any ***** sense whatsoever? I mean first of all the wording is abysmal, but aren't we looking for carriers to COUPLE the cost of the plan to how much strain it puts on their network? I would say it's completely decoupled right now, in their favor. - utnow, on 03/02/2009, -0/+4Followed by the refutal.
- rocke86, on 03/02/2009, -0/+4So why do price plans for cellular data seem to be discouraging their adoption? Umm... because they cost way too much.
- Izzmo, on 03/02/2009, -0/+2Knocked down for saying Sprint is uninnovative. WiMaX... c'mon now. It's the most innovative thing done by a telecom company in years.
- tech42er, on 03/02/2009, -1/+3"My bill is almost a 100% predictable under Verizon, but if it weren't for a 20% corporate discount, I'd be paying $30/mth more than I did under AT&T."
THIS. Verizon has the best coverage in my area and the best CS, but they're very expensive. I love my Verizon blackberry (truly unlimited data sans tethering for $30/month) but if I wasn't getting the 20% discount, I don't think I would have signed up with them. Sprint's got the ebst prices if you want data, but the service sucks. - tech42er, on 03/02/2009, -1/+3No, that's not true. The reason people have cell carriers isn't voice transmission; it's coverage. VoIP relies oN WiFi. Only once we have WiMax or similar technologies (which are essentially the merging of WiFi and cellular networks) will cell carriers be finished. In the meantime, people still want to make calls and use data in a lot of places where there's no WiFi.
- GovernmentsGun, on 03/03/2009, -0/+2When I have a cell phone, it's rare that I use it. I don't often text, I never browse the web on it. I mainly us it to make phone calls, and record verbal notes during my day. Typically I use about 120 minutes a month.
That being said, I have a price point of about $35 a month, because all I want to do is essentially make phone calls. And I don't even really need this. So, because I have trouble finding a plan that I like, especially since most plans are now offering upwards of 500 minutes a month, I ditched my cell phone. It's really a non-essential for us.
If cell phone companies want customers like me, they have to offer much lower price. - FlaG8r, on 03/02/2009, -0/+1You'd think the lock-in level you are talking about would encourage one them to want to be the carrier that breaks through and offers a decent data plan. They would stand to grab a great market share for years to come.
- Dotcommer, on 03/02/2009, -3/+4check again then. lol
- benitojuarez, on 03/02/2009, -0/+1wasnt sprint the first to have 3g also? now everyones like omg 3g network, i had that ***** years ago. additionally theres a hack out there for sprint winmo phones that lets you tether without sprint knowing ago it. i cant explain exactly how it works but i havent seen any 60 dollar tethering charges on my bill when i do some browsing with my laptop or connect my zune to my phone to download new music from the marketplace when im out.
- pumanegra2012, on 03/03/2009, -0/+1Are they offering "value for money?"
- AmusedToDeath, on 03/03/2009, -1/+2If Lexus had to shell out the money to build their own road system and oil refineries, you might see such a plan in action.
- NeoTechni, on 03/03/2009, -1/+2The iphone main menu even has IPOD on it.
- HurricaneDC, on 03/02/2009, -1/+2Why do people act like WiMAX is the best thing since sliced bread? Sounds like another name for mobile broadband, complete with overpriced monthly fees and slavery-like contracts.
- LANjackal, on 03/03/2009, -0/+1Yeah, but there're much better margins to be made maintaining the status quo than in grabbing market share by being a game changer. A pure "data" plan makes you a "dumb pipe", which is exactly the fate most providers are trying to avoid (see ISPs for a good example. This is why Verizon is offering TV, Comcast is offering phone service, etc). The Dumb Pipe business is very low-margin one, which is why no one wants to be in it.
- mkpaa, on 03/02/2009, -1/+210-20€/month (depending on carrier) for 3g on any device, if you happen to have 2 devices carrier gives your another sim. Welcome to Europe. :)
- trollick, on 03/03/2009, -0/+1O RLY?
- harperg, on 03/02/2009, -3/+3The Cell Carriers know that once Brain Cancer takes off they will be screwed.
Brain Cancer = No need for a cell carrier. - inactive, on 03/02/2009, -1/+1It's easy for outsiders looking in to blame them. Try talking to the engineer that designed it or the man that has to pay for the infrastructure to be maintained. Pricing is designed to extract as much profit as possible. I wish I could get unlimited everything for free, but it's not going to happen. Someone has to pay.
- Rothbardosaurus, on 03/03/2009, -1/+1A) Consumers and producers decide the fair price when they make a transaction. If the telcos don't want to provide it at that price, then there's no reason they should be forced to. I'm sure that as soon as one of them finds a way to make it that cheap they'll offer it. They are in competition with one another after all.
B) Entry cost into any industry would be significantly lowered if we did away with the IRS. - robbiedo, on 03/02/2009, -1/+1 One of the big costs for cellular companies is simply bandwidth. The US Government sells bandwidth which is very expensive. Those costs are paid by consumers in service plans. Ultimately, from a consumer standpoint, bandwidth should have given to the cell phone companies in the same manner that bandwidth was given to television broadcasters.
- clickwir, on 03/02/2009, -3/+3You should see the cell phone situation in .... no, I shouldn't. I live in the US. I'm going to worry about what it is here.
- trollick, on 03/03/2009, -2/+2No, countries where you have to drink water mixed with somebody's piss (that is most countries) are embarrassment around the world, not US.
- inactive, on 03/03/2009, -1/+0So,ArsTechnica SAYS that the publics wants all this and that makes it so?
Srry, but most people jsut don't give a ***** about having access to their e-mail 24/7. Do they not realize still that half of cell phone users are still on PRE-PAID plans? - ww3ace, on 03/02/2009, -2/+1there is no data plan for the ipod. its all wifi.
- inactive, on 03/02/2009, -9/+7It's the data plans that keep me from getting an Ipod.
- designerutah, on 03/02/2009, -3/+1I've always thought providers were stupid not to offer a staggered offering like this.
Basic (low, low price, but 500-700 minutes)
Premium (higher price, 500-700 minutes, internet, but with moderate cap on data used)
Then if more is used, ta$10 per "step" of increase. - Manther, on 03/02/2009, -5/+2All that and the fact that while the iPhone is the cream of the crop here in the U.S., you'd get laughed at in Asia if you had one (saw the article last week right here on Digg).
- Rothbardosaurus, on 03/02/2009, -6/+3This is the most innovative industry we've got, thanks to the fact that regulation is relatively light. Either A) the consumers aren't actually ready for the features yet (read: unwilling to pay for them) or B) there is some law, patent or regulation fixing the price of these things higher than what the market will bear.
If the consumers really want it, and the government or legal structure isn't hindering things, then there is no reason that makes any business sense for someone not to provide it. - Spire3660, on 03/02/2009, -7/+2iPhones are still in the iPod lineup last time i checked....
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is