Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Sprint Customers Face 5GB Hotspot Data Cap, As of Oct. 2

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the that's-enough-for-the-likes-of-you dept.

Wireless Networking 222

zacharye writes "Sprint on Thursday confirmed that it will soon introduce a data cap tied to its mobile hotspot add-on for smartphone users. Currently, Sprint subscribers with compatible smartphones can pay an extra $29.99 per month for unlimited Wi-Fi tethering, which allows other devices to connect via Wi-Fi in order to utilize a Sprint phone's 3G or 4G data connection. Beginning October 2nd, the mobile hotspot add-on will be capped at 5GB of data per month."

cancel ×

222 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

usb tethering? (1)

bhcompy (1877290) | more than 2 years ago | (#37484738)

How does this affect USB tethering, if at all?

Re:usb tethering? (1)

negRo_slim (636783) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485186)

As long as you not using an sort of "official" application then I don't believe this will effect you.

Re:usb tethering? (1)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485274)

I was actually planning on paying for tethering and dropping my land line internet once sprint brought 4g to my city. No more. I'll just keep using an unofficial tether program on the occasions I find it useful.

Re:usb tethering? (1)

John Courtland (585609) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485586)

WIMAX sucks ass anyhow, get Verizon's LTE 4G, it's really nice.

Hehe (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37484742)

I have a pokemon bra.

Re:Hehe (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37484786)

And an anus full of my cum.

Re:Hehe (0)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485066)

Qrpbqr guvf frperg zrffntr naq jva n frafr bs fzht, frys-fngvfsnpgvba!

Re:Hehe (1)

Ironhandx (1762146) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485638)

Jul gunax lbh. Gur fzht frys-fngvfsnpgvba vf uvtuyl nccrnyvat.

Can't control it, so cap it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37484750)

Invest in your damn network infrastructure, you big goddamn babies. Your shareholders can go without their precious dividends for a while.

Re:Can't control it, so cap it (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#37484772)

Call me paranoid, but I have this sneaking suspicion that this might have something to do with AT&T trying to buy T-Mobile.

In terms of generosity, perhaps... (1)

gweilo8888 (921799) | more than 2 years ago | (#37484812)

Call me paranoid, but I have this sneaking suspicion that this might have something to do with AT&T trying to buy T-Mobile."

Indeed. If they'd already successfully bought T-Mobile, the cap wouldn't be anywhere near so "generous".

Re:Can't control it, so cap it (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37484912)

Absolutely. If ATT buys T-Mobile then ATT will increase the prices, which is why Sprint is trying to block it. So, it makes sense that Sprint would just raise their prices and/or change their policies because they can. If you believe this then I have some beach front property on the moon to sell you.

Sprint limited their data cap because 1) they can, 2) they know their customers like them better than the rival so they damage will be minimal, and 3) because right now they can blame ATT as their simple scapegoat of the day.

If ATT did nothing at all today it would still have no impact on Sprint.

Stop being gullible and realize their just screwing their users.

What's funny, in light of all this, the new company motto is "F!@# the customer, we will change the policy and accept X% of customers jumping ship". You should be blaming Netflix, not ATT for this whole mess. After all, that's the new business model of accepting % client base losses over what you care about.

Re:Can't control it, so cap it (2)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485166)

I suspect it has more to do with Sprint getting the iPhone 5.

Re:Can't control it, so cap it (3, Insightful)

TheEyes (1686556) | more than 2 years ago | (#37484940)

Invest in your damn network infrastructure, you big goddamn babies. Your shareholders can go without their precious dividends for a while.

Sprint hasn't turned a profit in four years. I'm pretty sure they're not paying dividends.

Re:Can't control it, so cap it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37485132)

In fact, they do not pay a dividend.

Dammit (0)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 2 years ago | (#37484802)

I was considering finally getting a smartphone and Sprint was at the top of my list due to their unlimited plans. So much for that.

Also (2)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 2 years ago | (#37484872)

The spokesperson did not clarify what happens once the 5GB cap is reached, however an earlier report indicated that customers will be billed $0.05 per megabyte over 5GB if their usage goes over the cap in a single billing period.

$50 per GB overage. I bet they don't even try to tell you until you get your bill either.

Re:Also (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485194)

This is probably a cheaper option then.

http://store.truconnect.com/devices/truconnect-mifi.html [truconnect.com]

Re:Also (1)

SomePgmr (2021234) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485300)

$5/mo + .039/mb * 5120 mb = ~$205.00

Not sure that's the least expensive option.

Re:Also (2)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485544)

The pricing will be quoted in a dark corner of a far subpage on their web page, done in Flash [heyah.pl] to make sure you can't use a search engine or hyperlinks.

Can you guess how much T-Mobile (Heyah) charges for 7 MB of data roaming? Above $200 -- fortunately, I had "only" that much on a prepaid plan. They do advertise prominently their roaming prices for EU and US, but hide the rates for the rest of Europe as much as they can. Would you expect these could possibly be several orders of magnitude higher? Neither did I.

Obviously, you don't use mobile networks from abroad if you don't have to. I happened to use an ATM machine, and minutes later got a message from the bank about a massive withdrawal. It later turned out to be faulty -- a bug in formatting that I don't blame the bank that much for (errors happen). Obviously royally scared, I immediately visit the bank's page (with a regular browser, they have special apps for iPhone and Android only). It turns out to not work with Firefox Mobile, Maemo MiniB, ancient Chromium nor ELinks -- I succeeded on the 5th try, with Opera. Had only two other installed browsers left :p. Sadly, Opera had no adblock and the bank's page has several big Flash animations, getting me to 7MB used just to check the balance. Great.

Naturally, T-Mobile's customer service says these rates are not an error.

Thus, what you say is not an exception, it's the standard operating procedure.

Re:Dammit (3, Insightful)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 2 years ago | (#37484892)

Did you even bother to read the summary? This a cap on using your phone as a wifi hot spot. They still have unlimited data plans and this doesn't change that.

Re:Dammit (0, Troll)

imric (6240) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485046)

So fucking what? This is another company controlling what you do with ones and zeroes, while claiming to be 'unlimited'. You work for Sprint, or what?

Re:Dammit (1)

Hartree (191324) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485094)

If he's like me, he read the summary. But he wanted to use the unlimited data as a hotspot for his home network when he's there. It'd be a good backup for Comcast even if I didn't ditch their pretty scratchy cablemodem service.

5 gig gets eaten up pretty quickly for that. So, Sprint just removed the reason I was considering getting one of their smartphones. A pity.

In the rural area I live in, it's unlikely that their links would get saturated even with a fair number of users doing that.

I'll just stick with my trackfone. With as little as I do voice calls, a more featured phone/plan is little use to me. A high bandwidth limit/unlimited data connection plus a smartphone would have been useful.

Re:Dammit (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485162)

I used a Virgin Mobile usb stick (Virgin is just a Sprint brand at this point), back in January it got saturated lots of evenings, in a somewhat rural area (but close enough to a medium size city).

Re:Brilliant Analysis (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37485118)

So, the change of this service doesn't change a different and distinct service. Brilliant Analysis!

Did _you_ even bother to read it? The service is a $29.99 addon which _was_ unlimited. Now it isn't. Facts are stubborn things I know...

Re:Dammit (1)

Adriax (746043) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485092)

The carriers are just begging for someone (google...) to come in, toss up a bunch of towers across the US, and offer a data only wireless access plan with no caps. And the nation will rejoice.
A phone number tethered to a cell phone is unneeded anymore. Skype/gtalk/ect... clients on the phone can easily take over the voice calling aspects, text messages too.
The ability to separate out the features a cell phone offers and shop around has been possible for awhile now. The carriers know this and are doing all they can to make sure you stay bundled together with them for voice/text/web/the handset.

Re:Dammit (3, Insightful)

vijayiyer (728590) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485202)

It's the "toss up a bunch of towers" that's extremely expensive and impossible in some locales, like San Francisco, where residents will fight tooth and nail over "radiation".

Re:Dammit (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37485440)

That's why you start where people aren't crazy. Then you let your product speak for itself, and soon the small group of outspoken opponents will have to deal with a very annoyed majority.

Re:Dammit (1)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485308)

If google or any one else did this they would get sued by everyone. Hell the big carriers sue anyone who tries to setup their own stuff in small rural areas. Granted how effective it wouldn't nearly as effective against someone as large as google as opposed small moneyless farmers or organizations.

Re:Dammit (1)

bws111 (1216812) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485410)

Why wait for Google or someone else to do that? If you think that is such a great idea, put together a business plan that involves spending a ton of money to build towers, remaining price competitive with the existing carriers (so you can attract more than just the very few top bandwidth users), and overbuilding your network so that no user ever runs into a cap or throttling situation. Pitch that plan to investors, and have a go at it.

Re:Dammit (4, Interesting)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485474)

And google would learn the same lesson. Wireless Internet is fraud. Everybody hypes it, everybody advertises people watching video and doing all sorts of high bitrate stuff. But once a net goes out of beta test there isn't enough actual bandwidth available on the chunks of spectrum devoted to 3/4G to feed the screaming hordes who sign up. And until they go seriously into microcell and put nodes on every light pole there never will be... and probably not even then because our voracious desire for ever faster will have outstripped even that. So everyone slaps bandwidth caps on to stop the YouTube viewers, the video calls and all that foolishness and the network limps and groans along under the impossible load that still remains.

It is math people. There just ain't enough airspace to stuff that many bit into. Wires and fibers aren't dead yet.

Re:Dammit (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485648)

Or the mobile companies realize they have a near-monopoly on the market, the average consumer will never notice how much they are being gouged, and there is too large a price-of-entry for any real competition to exist, so they gouge their "customers" out the ass. Yes, there is a limit to wireless bandwith, but that isn't why it is so expensive. It is expensive for the same reason many wired ISPs have 5GB caps: because they can. And because the profit is so good they have no interest in actually expanding their network to properly service their customers.

Re:Dammit (4, Insightful)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485820)

> Yes, there is a limit to wireless bandwith, but that isn't why it is so expensive.

Yup, that is reason #1, #2 and #3. Because without caps people would use their wireless like they use their wired Internet. Hell, most people would just ditch their wired Internet in favor of tethering. After all, in most tech savvy households every member old enough to use they Internet is already packing a smartphone. It would just make sense. Except there isn't nearly enough bandwidth for that. Pricing is nature's way of forcing people to share a finite resource. Of course if people really were willing to fork over enough money, more spectrum, towers, whatever would become available to service that demand.

> It is expensive for the same reason many wired ISPs have 5GB caps: because they can

No, again it is sorta supply and demand. So long as it was just a few netheads slurping up extreme amounts of bandwidth the ISPs were willing to ignore it because they all felt the word "UNLIMITED" in the ad copy was more important. Heck, few customers would even be able to know how much Internet they were using so fear of hitting a cap and getting billed zillions of dollars in overages would have impeded uptake of the Internet. Nobody would have watched many YouTube videos. Nobody would have let anyone else touch their PC (remember Compuserve? Who would have let the neighbor's kid plop down in front of their CI$ account? Almost nobody.), the kids would have been strictly monitored, etc. And no explosive growth. People wouldn't have become addicted. But then Netflix and Hulu threatened to saturate the net with video. In direct competition to the bundles the ISPs (now down to the cable and phone companies in most markets) were offering. The combined threat to both their network infrastructure and cash flow became greater than their fear of customer reaction to caps.

And please remember, yes the cable company sells you 10+mbps service but on the understanding your use will be bursty, not constant. They oversubscribe their outbound link 10:1 or more. And don't bitch about that being unfair. They also sell real service intended for heavy use with an SLA promising you will get every last bit per second you are paying for, try pricing it sometime.

Re:Dammit (2)

Endo13 (1000782) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485696)

Why is it then that we don't hear about crap like this from places like Japan, where internet speeds and population density are both much higher?

No ATT you cannot buy T-Mobile (1)

Moheeheeko (1682914) | more than 2 years ago | (#37484876)

It'll make out network and services look bad by comparison!

They are acting like the cable co used to act with (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 2 years ago | (#37484882)

They are acting like the cable co used to act with routers where they said no or wanted you to pay more to use more then one system.

Re:They are acting like the cable co used to act w (1)

Dynedain (141758) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485020)

DSL providers used to do this too.

The only problem is that at least Cable ISPs were in competition with DSL providers, and for a while there were a relatively many to choose from.

In the US cellphone market, you have essentially 4 providers (possibly soon to be 3) with the same data-cap policies.

Re:They are acting like the cable co used to act w (1)

tmosley (996283) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485070)

It sure would be nice if they would allow some more competition. Too bad the little guys can't afford e911, cost of compliance with FCC regulations, etc. If they didn't have to pay that, we might have a situation more like the rest of the developed world.

Re:They are acting like the cable co used to act w (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37485182)

Right now I'm using MetroPCS, I have unlimited LTE (although it's only around 3Mbit speeds in my area), talk and text for $50/month. They don't offer a tethering plan but that is easily fixed by rooting your phone.

Re:They are acting like the cable co used to act w (1)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485572)

Do they still use DPI to get between your phone and music/image files so that you can't DL them without going through their shitty store?

Re:They are acting like the cable co used to act w (1)

webdog314 (960286) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485600)

Except that the cable company CAN add more hardware to increase their throughput, the cell companies have a fixed amount of bandwidth to slice up at any given time. In higher density areas or at peak usage times, more towers wouldn't help.

Stop this BS (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37484894)

"Hi, would you like to subscribe to our unlimited bandwidth plan"
"Sure!"
"Hello again, I see you've been using some of our bandwidth, I'm afraid when we said 'unlimited' what we actually mean was 'severely and punitively limited' so your going to have to either stop or pay us a fuck ton more money"

Why the hell are corporations worldwide allowed to keep pulling this shit? If it's not a straight bait-and-switch then it's using a rather unconventional definition of unlimited, and every single time they are allowed to get away with it.

Re:Stop this BS (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 2 years ago | (#37484914)

This is only when using the hotspot addon. The data plan is still unlimited otherwise.

Re:Stop this BS (1, Redundant)

imric (6240) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485058)

Unlimited as long as you only use those ones and zeroes the way Sprint says you can.

Re:Stop this BS (1)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485332)

It is unlimited... for limited values of unlimited.

Re:Stop this BS (2)

pdfsmail (2423750) | more than 2 years ago | (#37484988)

Holy shit Im gonna have a heart attack.. I thought I was the only person on earth who thought this same thing.... Someone needs to put their foot down on these companies, they are all using similar tactics to make a system that is owned by a few companies, but act like a single monopoly by sharing the same bad ideas. No one will step up though.. it would be nice but everyone thinks someone else will do it or its not worth it..... I just need power to do it..

Re:Stop this BS (4, Insightful)

tmosley (996283) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485152)

Not worldwide. This is only in America, baby!

Re:Stop this BS (1)

PopeScott (1343031) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485412)

They are Jobs Makers you socialist savage.

Re:Stop this BS (1)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485520)

Seriously. I was in the local mall last month and, I shit you not, saw a big sign saying "Unlimited Voice, Text and Data*" with very small print saying "* 2GB limit on data". This word you keep using, I do not think it means what you think it means. Wish I could remember which outfit was doing it now but I remember pointing it out to the wife and laughing loudly enough it annoyed the weasel manning the kiosk.

Where is the police? Don't they patrol the mall? None of them bother to notice obvious, blatant fraud?

Re:Stop this BS (1)

jader3rd (2222716) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485554)

It sounds like it's still unlimited, as long as it's all coming from your phone. Now I agree with you that they should call unlimited unlimited and shouldn't be able to call anything besides unlimited unlimited; this is just unlimited except for within certain limitations.

jailbreak the phone that is ok under the law (2)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 2 years ago | (#37484902)

jailbreak the phone that is ok under the law and use a 3rd party hotspot app.

Re:jailbreak the phone that is ok under the law (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37484984)

This is not an iphone. root it...

Re:jailbreak the phone that is ok under the law (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37484990)

However breaking Sprint's TOS while using Sprint isn't ok with the law.

Re:jailbreak the phone that is ok under the law (1)

ohmygodatoyrobot (1272508) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485502)

That's why I paid the extra for the tethering service.

Re:jailbreak the phone that is ok under the law (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37485000)

My phone comes with a built-in hotspot app, but I'm on T-Mo, so no cap (Unless the AT&T-Mo merger happens, then all bets are likely off.)

Re:jailbreak the phone that is ok under the law (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37485114)

Rooting is legal, a 3rd party hotspot app is theft of service.

Re:jailbreak the phone that is ok under the law (1)

rhook (943951) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485222)

How is it possible to steal a service you already have? All you are doing is enabling a feature on your phone, perfectly legal. Hotspot add-on plans are nothing more than a means to double charge you for the same data service you already have.

no locking out 3th party stuff is antitrust (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485550)

no locking out 3th party stuff and makeing you pay for the 1th party app is antitrust

How much does it cost now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37484904)

Do customers still have to pay the $29,99 per month for now limited data?

5 gig cap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37484918)

29.95 worth of useless.

DIY (2)

mfwitten (1906728) | more than 2 years ago | (#37484930)

Do we really need these telcos anyway? Wouldn't it be possible to establish a network of cheap transceivers throughout neighborhoods and cities for at least the purpose of carrying voice and video communications? Then population centers could be connected by a few larger transceivers jointly managed by both communities. Heck, I'd bet we could implement higher fidelity audio data too.

Caps are arbitrary limitations for the purpose of stealing as much profit as possible from consumers; these communications companies who put on caps are basically saying: "Actually, we aren't any good at communications."

[Disclaimer: I don't really know what I'm talking about, which I'm sure someone will point out.]

Re:DIY (2)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485006)

"Caps are arbitrary limitations for the purpose of stealing as much profit as possible from consumers;"

That's ridiculous. Capacity will always be finite and so there will always be some kind of cap. In the past connections were so slow that you could get away without an actual transfer cap. Now, not so much. All they're doing is putting an actual number on the cap instead of selectively enforcing some ill defined limit.

If you think you can set up your own cellular network in competition, go for it. "A network of cheap transceivers" isn't cheap when you need to cover a whole city, and neither is a city to city link. And what are you going to do when someone comes along and maxes out your network 24-7? I guess you could impose some sort of limits....

Re:DIY (1)

sohmc (595388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485160)

I don't deny that bandwidth/capacity/etc is a finite resource...but you have to admit when a company says "unlimited", you think, "wow! I can use as much as I want!"

Back in the bad old days of broadband, they advertised "UNLIMITED!" without restrictions and with no mouse print.

Some companies still do this, but then they hide the language in their 12 page TOS.

If it's not unlimited, don't say it is.

Re:DIY (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485708)

Exactly. The problem is not with caps, the problem is implying there are no caps. Everybody (in the US) seems to get mad when a company announces they're imposing a cap, but all they're doing is being honest about something that was always true.

My internet plan is advertised with a speed and an amount of data, both per month. I think it's overpriced, but it is honest.

Re:DIY (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485480)

How is the amount of data limited? Is it a resource that has to be mined or collected?

Bandwidth (as in, data transferred per unit of time) is limited by the capacity of the network. Amount of data isn't.

What they're trying to do is limit bandwidth (which is grossly oversold) by limiting your ability to use it. Nothing to do with it being finite.

Re:DIY (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485734)

Take the bandwidth of a network (measured in bits per second) and multiply by some customary amount of time (say a month). See that number? That's the maximum number of bits you can squeeze through the network in that time period. It's finite. Limited. It really is bandwidth, just measured over a different time period, but we like to call it an amount because the time period is so long we don't think of it as a rate.

However you want to think of it, it is limited.

Re:DIY (1)

hawkeyeMI (412577) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485052)

I keep hoping for this but I understand it's rather complex to make such a network function well.

it's 15659bps, nothing more (2)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 2 years ago | (#37484968)

Ok, so please remind me why are they allowed to market these speeds as anything above 15.6kbit they are?

We need a law that says burst speeds must be quoted no more prominently than the long-term one.

Re:it's 15659bps, nothing more (1)

ohmygodatoyrobot (1272508) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485102)

Telcos have deep pocketed lobbyists, consumers don't.

Re:it's 15659bps, nothing more (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485432)

Actually, consumers have several.

Re:it's 15659bps, nothing more (1)

ohmygodatoyrobot (1272508) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485558)

With deep pockets? No.

Important question: get out of my Sprint contract? (1)

ohmygodatoyrobot (1272508) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485010)

I have an Android with all the bells and whistles and use tethering all the time. Can I break my Sprint contract because of this?

Re:Important question: get out of my Sprint contra (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37485230)

I have an Android with all the bells and whistles and use tethering all the time.

Can I break my Sprint contract because of this?

You should be able too if you are paying for the tethering capabilities. This a modification tot he terms of service therefore you should be able to leave the contract with no penalties.

Re:Important question: get out of my Sprint contra (1)

froggymana (1896008) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485236)

I have an Android with all the bells and whistles and use tethering all the time.

Can I break my Sprint contract because of this?

You probably could. But who are you going to move to then? Verizon? They cap normal data as well, where sprint still has unlimited. Att? They have lower caps than Verizon.

You could root your phone and wireless tether for free.

Re:Important question: get out of my Sprint contra (1)

rhook (943951) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485288)

I'm pretty sure that anytime there is a contract change made you have the option of ending it without penalty.

Re:Important question: get out of my Sprint contra (1)

Glendale2x (210533) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485334)

Normally yes, once they change the terms you have 30 days to read them over and think about it. If you don't cancel before then it's assumed you agreed. In the past I've received a notice in the mail about any changes in the terms.

Re:Important question: get out of my Sprint contra (1)

ohmygodatoyrobot (1272508) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485404)

Thank you. I was a Sprint "Premier" customer until they got rid of that and I'm paying out the nose for this thing, the bill is around $118/month without insurance on the phone. I want to shop around a bit. It's just ridiculous how they railroad consumers.

Zero bps. (1)

Xeleema (453073) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485018)

I have a Samsung Epic 4G and haven't been able to get the HotSpot to work (tethered or not). Ever. Google, forums, and IRC have all pointed to signs of a "disabled" (read: Will always generate an error) feature. If all the cellphone companies are pimps, at least Sprint beats on me less and only takes HALF my money.

Re:Zero bps. (1)

Solandri (704621) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485494)

No major carrier offers you the hotspot feature for free (even though Android natively supports it if the carriers hadn't blocked it). You have to either root the phone, or pay the carrier's hotspot fee. In Sprint's case it was $29.99/mo with unlimited bandwidth. Now apparently it's $29.99/mo with a 5 GB data cap.

The hotspot feature works fine if you root your phone. Don't use Sprint's hotspot app - it looks specifically for a hotspot plan. Download WiFi Tether [google.com] instead. There are some issues turning it on with 4G enabled - turn it on with only 3G enabled, then turn on 4G and it works fine. And AFAIK Sprint's regular unlimited phone data plans are still unlimited.

Getting ready for iPhone 5 maybe..? (2)

Amiga500_Rulez (988955) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485030)

I wonder if that's the real reason.

I am one of those faggots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37485036)

that currently wastes 29.99 a month for the convenience of a wifi hotspot whereever I go. Thanks to this announcement, I will properly jailbreak my phone, and get the internets whereever I goes for frees. Thanks Sprint. Your faggyness, has caused me to choose to be a little less faggy, and more geeky.

so that worked in the first place? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37485048)

I have always gotten such a crappy signal where ever I am anyway with any recent cell phone its like saying I can only hunt 10 sharks a month in the forest.

Dear Spring Customers: Take Your Phone AND Sprint (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37485054)

and blend [youtube.com] them!!!

Yours In Osh,
Kilgore Trout

P.S. : Alfred E. Neuman For President

Looks like they can't use that commercial anymore (1)

sohmc (595388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485074)

For reference [youtube.com]
I wish companies would stop using the word "unlimited" when they really mean "limited". Same thing goes toward coupons that say "No limitations!" but when you read the fine print it says, "Not for gift cards, furniture, clothes, anything we sell, really."

Re:Looks like they can't use that commercial anymo (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485546)

To be fair, I didn't see anything in that ad about unlimited tethering, and the rest is still unlimited.

Sprint is just as evil as Verizon and AT&T (1)

rrohbeck (944847) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485204)

In other news, a wireless hotspot is a standard feature of Android if your vendor hasn't disabled it and several networks (e.g. T-Mobile) offer unlimited data plans at a reasonable price.

Re:Sprint is just as evil as Verizon and AT&T (1)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485666)

And refuses to sign up customers in my zip code. T-Mobile: no bars. Verizon: Evil Incarnate. Sprint: Meh. AT&T: Big, Stupid, thinks they are still The Phone Company. Everyone else: Buys tower access from one of the other four.

I rarely use a cell so I'm currently on a dinky little prepaid outfit called h2o wireless. Cheap if you don't actually use a phone a lot. Throw $10 or $20 at em and the phone is live for 90 days or until you burn off the credit at $0.14/minute for voice or $0.05/text. And they sell you a SIM card you can put into whatever you want which sealed the deal for me. I have currently have mine in very small android phone. Decent PDA, better in some ways than the old Handspring Visor it replaced, not better in others. A month without worrying about the battery was the best feature of the Visor, no android device can offer that though. Heck, no device with an always on radio is going to offer that.

Due to the IPhone on Sprint (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37485290)

This is because of the fact that Sprint will soon get the iPhone, to be released in a few weeks.

This is just stupid (1)

certain death (947081) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485314)

Back in the day (yep, I am old!) before there were cell phones in every empty hand happily clicking away at the mobile web, facebook, youtube, etc., there were no cell phones. I believe it was AT&T, or someone who worked for them who designed the first cell phone. Why on earth don't they invest the same time and money they did coming up with the goddamn things in the first place to develop a better technology to make the damn things scale better? It is just plain stupid to keep plugging in more antennas hoping you can keep adding millions of users to an infrastructure that was developed 30-40 years ago. It don't work for high speed internet access, and it won't work for them. AT&T! HEY! You are _going_ to have to spend some fucking money, get over it bitches!

Re:This is just stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37485658)

Stupid is NOT adding more antennas.
Draw large circles now draw small circles.
Do you see the solution?

Re:This is just stupid (1)

StormReaver (59959) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485660)

Why on earth don't they invest the same time and money they did coming up with the goddamn things in the first place to develop a better technology to make the damn things scale better?

Because you keep giving them your money with the technology they already have. What incentive are you giving them to improve?

Re:This is just stupid (1)

certain death (947081) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485700)

No, I don't. I haven't paid for a cell phone in over 10 years... Now, my employer does, they give them LOTS of money! :o)

Just in time! (2)

joe_kull (238178) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485414)

You can blame this on Sprint's roll-out of the iPhone 5, coming next month.

How does this affect the current Sprint commercial (1)

Khyber (864651) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485436)

You know, the one that claims that Sprint gives unlimited data on their network vs every other company, which is currently playing right now on my TV?

Re:How does this affect the current Sprint commerc (1)

majormer (313356) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485604)

You know, the one that claims that Sprint gives unlimited data on their network vs every other company, which is currently playing right now on my TV?

I guess this directly conflicts with the commercial, that stresses that when they say Unlimited, they mean it! They do highlight that the other companys cap bandwidth, but Sprint goes on and on without slowing down or anything. At least the other companies aren't saying one thing and doing the opposite.

How is this reasonable? (1)

supersat (639745) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485702)

Clear offers unlimited mobile 4G Internet for not much more per month, AND they use the same 4G network as Sprint! (Sprint is a major investor in Clearwire.)

If Clear starts capping usage at 5GB, that'll be the end of their business model (since they advertise themselves as an alternative to cable or DSL).

Retroactive? What about Buffered Browsing? (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485730)

Is this retroactive to all existing customers? That wasn't clear. If so, that sux like illegal bait and switch scams sux.

Also, if there is no limit in downloading data to the phone itself, and the phone can link to other devices by WiFi, Bluetooth, and/or USB cable, what if you have one app that downloads data to your phone memory card, and a second app running asynchronously reads that memory card and moves data out to other local devices. And the process can be reversed to send data from other devices through this NVRAM buffer out to the Internet. Functionally equivalent to tethering, but not tethering as defined by the phone company who says that you can download unlimited data to your phone itself? Yes it shows how ridiculous these artificial restrictions are, but I'll bet (IANAL) that it would hold up in court because it only downloads data to the phone. What you do with that data afterwards is completely up to you.

New Pro-Consumer Regulation (4, Interesting)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485774)

I'm not in favor of new regulations, but I'd support this one. Quite simple: BIG TEXT overrules small text. If you say UNLIMITED DATA with or without an asterisk, even if the small text says 2GB or 5GB or any GB cap, it doesn't apply. Simple as that.

Unlimited nights and weekends? (1)

Ichijo (607641) | more than 2 years ago | (#37485826)

The caps are really only needed to prevent the network from getting overloaded during peak periods. The caps don't need to apply during times of low demand.

An indiscriminate cap is a pretty clumsy way to prevent network saturation. So give us free unlimited nights and weekends.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?