[–] Drenki 2 points 0 points 2 points (+2|-2) ago (edited ago)
Tethering is essentially like doing all of your activity on your phone (browsing, downloading files, chat, voip calls, etc), but then immediately copying that information over to a computer via USB, wifi, bluetooth, etc.
Differentiating tethering from regular phone use is just bullshit marketing from corporations trying to suck as much money as they can from you.
Data doesn't even COST them anything. Not on its own at least. ISPs charge each other for peering fees. Those fees are determined by the 95th percentile of traffic.
Let's say T-Mobile had an arrangement with a peer (the ISP they connect to in order for their subscribers traffic to reach the rest of the internet) at 95th percentile of 100mbps (yes, unrealistically low, this is just an example). Traffic could flow at 95mbps and they would never hit an overage. As long as their customers pay their bills, there's no problem. If total traffic was at 5mbps, they'd make a pretty good profit. Obviously they want that case.
So how do they address the problem? Well, they just keep that link running at 95mbps. Subscribers would be locked into a certain transfer rate (95mbps / total number of active subscribers).
Problem solved, no overages, T-Mobile makes money, subscribers never hit a data cap. Everyone is happy.
But companies are greedy. They want to screw you over as hard as they can. So what do they do?
Like I said, ISPs like T-Mobile, and the companies they peer to, negotiate prices based on link speeds (Mbps).
But T-Mobile and other customer-facing ISPs (AT&T, Comcast, &c) charge customers by amount of data.
If they charged each customer based off link speed, all of this shit would go away.
What's even worse is that with peering agreements, if company A sends 100mbps of traffice to company B and company B sends the same RATE of traffic back, then they don't charge each other anything.
[–] on_the_nightshift ago
You are misinformed about mobile carrier peering agreements. Not all agreements are simply for link/port speed and only billed on the difference in traffic between the two ends. Most mobile carrier traffic doesn't traverse peering connections, but connections to tier 1 ISPs, where they are billed per MB/GB. As eyeball networks, somewhere in the neighborhood of 90%+ of their traffic is from the internet toward the subscriber, which is why they don't use the kind of direct peering you are talking about for the vast majority of their traffic. This doesn't even mention the cost of getting the data to the customer from the ISP across the WAN to the carrier's MTSO, then across the backhaul to the cellsite, and finally across the wireless spectrum to the phone. Bandwidth in the wireless spectrum is limited and extremely expensive to purchase and deploy.
Put simply, the amount of data used by customers DOES cost the mobile carrier money, and the costs are pretty huge if they have a large customer base. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see data on mobile networks come down in price, but it isn't going to for a while, and that isn't simply due to greed.
Source: I am a network engineer for a mobile carrier (not TMo) who works on this stuff every day..
I wouldn't say I'm misinformed so much as I know enough to understand why the current system is bad and wrong. I used to work for an ISP, but non-mobile, as well and was involved in reviewing the contracts when necessary. (I also have peers who have worked for smaller, private cell service ISPs)
With more people using their phones for voice and video calls, it's they're becoming less and less eyeball networks. If I am using my phone to stream to Twitch or YouTube, I'm definitely having an impact on the net flow.
I absolutely get how mobile spectrum is limited and what a huge pain in the ass it is to try to cover the ENTIRE United States. It's just a big damn mess because of how population density varies.
I side with the camp that says internet is more like a common carrier utility - I mean, that's how it started out. If the US had standardized its networking technologies and devices were able to hop from one network to another, we'd have great coverage by now.
[–] seth_storm 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Kind of hard to argue that when they arbitrarily switched people just to kill off grandfathered plans. If not for their interference, I would still be on a tzones plan that didn't give a damn about tethering.
[–] laserguidedpolarbear 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
From T-Mobile's perspective, there is zero difference between a packet that is delivered to a phone, and a packet that is delivered to a tethered device through a phone. There is no additional cost to them, there is no impact to their network, there is no reason to differentiate between data in these scenarios at all.
This is like electric companies telling you that you have a cap on how many batteries you can charge with the electricity they deliver to your home. Once you have delivered the electrons, it makes no difference to the provider what happens to them.
This is an artificial distinction created solely to serve greed.
[–] Totenglocke 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Why do they care what is using the data? If I'm paying them for unlimited data, why is it OK to use it to play Netflix for a month straight on my phone, but not on my laptop tethered to my phone?
[–] sniper98g 0 points 6 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago
I have the unlimited 4G, use my phone constantly all day, only connect to wifi if I don't have 4G service, and do everything I want including occasional tethering. I rarely exceed 5GB per month. I could probably go down to a lower plan but it wouldn't save me much money. If people are going over 21GB, they are doing some crazy shit with their phones.
Also worth noting that even with the 21GB cap, I pay $20 per month for 21GB on each of my lines ($40 total) Verizon and AT&T both charge $300 per month for slightly less data than that.
[–] Podunk 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
I have unlimited on Verizon and I use at least 30 hours a month of streaming video. I watch/listen to various shows and baseball games everyday at work. Depending on the stream quality it can run at 2Gb per hour. What the fuck good is a smart phone with only 5 gigs of data? If all you use is WiFi then why not just have a flip phone and a tablet and save yourself thousands per year? If it's because a tablet is too big then just buy a used smartphone and take out the sim card.
[–] avaimedia 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Streaming video is not considered "crazy shit."
[–] Tb0n3 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
[–] sniper98g ago
What are you doing with your phone to use so much data?