>In even smaller font: "$150/mo" is finally explained
That is really, truly, unfair. The font size choice is quite reasonable, and makes it easily readable.
Here's what it would look like if the text was the same size:
https://i.imgur.com/fTFlgHj.png
https://i.imgur.com/DCWpN9J.png
>"High-speed data up to 22 GB/person & slower after." is not unlimited data when the "slower after" speeds can barely load google's search page. It is, 'high-speed data up to 22 GB/person & slower after". Do we need to start throwing around a dictionary definition of the word unlimited? This is getting old...
I use Freedom (previously known as Wind) in Canada, and their "slower speeds" on the unlimited plans are more than satisfactory. I don't even notice that I'm throttled until I check my text messages.
As a result, I reach 12GB+ on my 6GB plan almost every month.
So for me, their unlimited plan is very much unlimited.
The top couple percent of T-Mobile USA users use over 50GB of data a month, mostly on unlimited plans without hard throttles. An "unlimited" plan that hard throttles at 22GB of usage is decietful given this context, hence all other carriers not using hard throttles on Unlimited plans.
All 4 major US carriers would brand this plan as a 22GB plan with no overages.
What are you smoking? Every one of Verizon's plans that have caps identical to this are "unlimited"
With a hard throttle there is no way a user could burn 200GB a month over LTE, but with deprioritization you still get full LTE speeds on most cell towers.
Actually meant "WILL unconditionally throttle you after 1 bit more than your quota, even in an evacuated area at 3am, to 128 or even 64kbps".
Like, email and even google maps, no problem. Facebook perfectly usable although with some lag. I didn't bother trying to watch videos.
I have been curious if the usability of "throttled" speeds differs between carriers.
Uh-huh. Missing video means the service is unusable.
Yeah, quality gets awful at that speed. For reference, the 'unlimited 480p' type of feature is six times that fast, 1.5Mbps.
If my phone throttled to 2Mbps, it wouldn't affect me very much. 0.25Mbps is not acceptable.
Here's what it would look like if they weren't trying to obfuscate the total:
Well, I do notice. Especially when I'm trying to operate telepresence robots or the like and the video streams crap out while you're trying to navigate. Or when I'm trying to work on my laptop outdoors far away from home and need to download lots of things over LTE.
Just because you only use 140-byte messages doesn't mean others who are trying to live the future don't notice.
>As a result, I reach 12GB+ on my 6GB plan almost every month. So for me, their unlimited plan is very much unlimited.
It isn't unlimited for me. I can easily hit 22GB. Unlimited means unlimited, and 22GB isn't unlimited.
"10 easy payments of 15 dollars!" Also, do you really want Google owning even more of the internet?
Yeah, but it's insulting. "Unlimited" is not unlimited with a fucking limit, doesn't matter how reasonable or unreasonable it is. Every time I look at an ad I gotta sit there and look for asterisks or numbers, and then find the fine print where the actual information is contained, not just the marketing wank.
How about just tell me how much your fucking thing costs in plain fucking English? Maybe I don't want to decipher your advert like it's a goddamn Captcha. $150 for Unlimited (assuming it was actually unlimited, which it's not) isn't even an unreasonable price, but when you lead with $50, and then oh by the way it's actually $150, oh and by the way it's limited, you've made what is logically a good deal now look tremendously worse for your effort of trying to "hook" me.
How about just tell me what it costs, you know, like you're an honest seller of a product and I'm a grown fucking man who you have an ounce of respect for?
There are lots of things I would do with something truly unlimited that I couldn't do with 22GB.
A criticism is that it is not clear if the "may stream 480p video" refers to the slower after and whether it is a "guarantee" or not really a possibility.
But for the rest it also explicitly tells you the maximum amount you might end up paying each month. Honestly do not see what you are complaining about.
If an ad for a lab oscilloscope were made that way, nobody would ever buy it.
https://mobilesyrup.com/2019/06/13/rogers-unlimited-infinite...
Taking a page from Freedom Mobile, the new plans offer ‘unlimited’ data in that they don’t include data overage fees. Instead, once subscribers go over their monthly data allotment, Rogers caps their data speeds at 256Kbps until the start of their next billing cycle.
10GB full speed.
"speeds may be optimized"??? Optimized for who?
Every jurisdiction I've been in that charges a consumption tax requires it be shown on the receipt, regardless of whether it was advertised as inc or ex tax.
Right, and that is the argument used against free tax returns in the US. They want taxes to be painful enough so that filing your taxes makes you think about them (and hence you would support the party that lowers taxes etc.)
Overall, this dubious logic will never go away.
A colleague of mine was told by a Swiss mobile phone provider that "unlimited" was a technical term meaning 5GB.
Within Switzerland all major carriers (Swisscom, Sunrise & Salt) have no data cap on their unlimited subscriptions.
On their Unlimited Europe subscriptions both Swisscom & Sunrise are capped at 40gb/month (while still being advertised as "unlimited"). Only Salt is truely unlimited there.
Still rip off compared to European prices/offers (€25 for actually unlimited).
It looks like Google Fi needs to work harder to be able to break into the Oz market (if it had any inclination to).
So, I guess unlimited means 100GB, and that's the best-case scenario. Okay then?
The bigger the font the more skeptical you should be. Always read the fine print.
So it will be equally fast if only a few people use the service (e. g. outside of populous areas), and much slower otherwise.
So it's not like they are going to have their network underloaded just to squeeze more money from customers.
If that hypothesis is true, it does not sound that bad.
If you use more than 15 GB of data in a cycle on the Fi Flexible plan or more than 22 GB in a cycle on the Fi Unlimited plan (less than 1% of individual Fi users as of Jan. 2018), you'll experience slower speeds (256 kbps) above those respective data thresholds until your next billing cycle begins.
If you need significant amounts of high speed data, you can opt to pay $10/GB for the data you use past the data threshold for your plan in a given cycle (15GB for Flexible or 22GB for Unlimited).
These data thresholds are based on individual data usage, not group data usage.
Since Google isn't actually deploying the cell networks and they actually use a mixed set of providers, I am not sure if this assumption makes sense.
If the mobile network T-Mobile is overloaded with T-Mobile customers and has a small fraction of Google ones, then Google will tell T-Mobile to throttle the customers that exceeded their contract limit?
Of course they are, why wouldn't they? It's not like it's any worse than any other "unlimited" plan you can get and giving out 10x more usage at 0x more cost isn't helping their margins while trying to get heavy users to pay per gig is.
In GIANT BOLD: $50
In smaller font: "each"
In even smaller font: "$150/mo" is finally explained
"High-speed data up to 22 GB/person & slower after." is not unlimited data when the "slower after" speeds can barely load google's search page. It is, 'high-speed data up to 22 GB/person & slower after". Do we need to start throwing around a dictionary definition of the word unlimited? This is getting old...
Just because it's google, doesn't mean they get a pass on car-salesman type sleazy sales tactics.
Why not just advertise it plainly? This method of advertising makes someone like me less likely to buy this product.