"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:4e15b9c1$0$2199$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>
> Fourth, while unlimited data sounds wonderful in theory, the reality is
> that very few uses use even 2GB a month and in fact more than half use
> less than 200MB.
But someone's usage could change drastically if or when they start using
something like iheartradio to listen to radio stations on their cell phone. http://iheartradio.com/main.html
Case in point: Now that I've started streaming radio stations to my cell I'm
at 2.7 gig of data with 7 days left on my billing cycle and I hardly ever
saw over 500k a month before.
So does anybody think Sprint would let me buy an iPhone and keep my
grandfathered unlimited data plan?
> But someone's usage could change drastically if or when they start using
> something like iheartradio to listen to radio stations on their cell phone.
> http://iheartradio.com/main.html
>
> Case in point: Now that I've started streaming radio stations to my cell I'm
> at 2.7 gig of data with 7 days left on my billing cycle and I hardly ever
> saw over 500k a month before.
>
> So does anybody think Sprint would let me buy an iPhone and keep my
> grandfathered unlimited data plan?
No one's opinion on Usenet matters much, but Sprint already offers
phones that can suck up much more data than the present iPhone (phones
with 1080p HDMI out ports).
You've pointed out one of the key issues facing Internet radio and one
of the key factors in Pandora's disappointing IPO and subsequent stock
performance. Internet radio's business model depends on piggybacking
onto unlimited or high-limit data plans, both mobile and DSL/cable. Yet
Sprint is the only major carrier still offering unlimited data. Both
AT&T and Comcast now limit data on their U-Verse and cable systems
(though to a level that is high enough for audio if the capacity isn't
used up for video).
On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 08:54:09 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
>Internet radio's business model depends on piggybacking
>onto unlimited or high-limit data plans, both mobile and DSL/cable. Yet
>Sprint is the only major carrier still offering unlimited data.
>Both AT&T and Comcast now limit data on their U-Verse and cable
>systems (though to a level that is high enough for audio if the
>capacity isn't used up for video).
Comcast has had caps in place for years. Their current 250GB 'soft'
cap should be plenty for streaming a couple dozen movies monthly.
Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:28:17 -0500]:
> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 08:54:09 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Internet radio's business model depends on piggybacking
>>onto unlimited or high-limit data plans, both mobile and DSL/cable. Yet
>>Sprint is the only major carrier still offering unlimited data.
>
>>Both AT&T and Comcast now limit data on their U-Verse and cable
>>systems (though to a level that is high enough for audio if the
>>capacity isn't used up for video).
>
> Comcast has had caps in place for years. Their current 250GB 'soft'
> cap should be plenty for streaming a couple dozen movies monthly.
Assuming you don't use your internet for anything else. Like the aforementioned
pandora, or for downloading new operating systems, or games or upload
photos to facebook or relatives, etc. etc.
>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:28:17 -0500]:
>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 08:54:09 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Internet radio's business model depends on piggybacking
>>>onto unlimited or high-limit data plans, both mobile and DSL/cable. Yet
>>>Sprint is the only major carrier still offering unlimited data.
>>
>>>Both AT&T and Comcast now limit data on their U-Verse and cable
>>>systems (though to a level that is high enough for audio if the
>>>capacity isn't used up for video).
>>
>> Comcast has had caps in place for years. Their current 250GB 'soft'
>> cap should be plenty for streaming a couple dozen movies monthly.
>
>Assuming you don't use your internet for anything else. Like the aforementioned
>pandora, or for downloading new operating systems, or games or upload
>photos to facebook or relatives, etc. etc.
I wasn't assuming that.
A typical movie streams (in HD) at less than 2 Mbps, but to be safe
I'll double that to 4Mbps. That same movie is about 90 minutes long.
Doing the math, that works out to less than 2.7GB per movie.
A dozen of those movies works out to 33GB (always rounding up).
Two dozen are 66GB, leaving over 180GB for other stuff. How much is
enough for 'other stuff'?
Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:18:40 -0500]:
> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 16:38:19 +0000 (UTC), Justin
> <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
>>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:28:17 -0500]:
>>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 08:54:09 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Internet radio's business model depends on piggybacking
>>>>onto unlimited or high-limit data plans, both mobile and DSL/cable. Yet
>>>>Sprint is the only major carrier still offering unlimited data.
>>>
>>>>Both AT&T and Comcast now limit data on their U-Verse and cable
>>>>systems (though to a level that is high enough for audio if the
>>>>capacity isn't used up for video).
>>>
>>> Comcast has had caps in place for years. Their current 250GB 'soft'
>>> cap should be plenty for streaming a couple dozen movies monthly.
>>
>>Assuming you don't use your internet for anything else. Like the aforementioned
>>pandora, or for downloading new operating systems, or games or upload
>>photos to facebook or relatives, etc. etc.
>
> I wasn't assuming that.
>
> A typical movie streams (in HD) at less than 2 Mbps, but to be safe
> I'll double that to 4Mbps. That same movie is about 90 minutes long.
> Doing the math, that works out to less than 2.7GB per movie.
Nope, from Netflix an HD stream is over 2Mbps, and most movies are 2 hours
these days. Doing the math you can stream for about 4 hours a day.
> A dozen of those movies works out to 33GB (always rounding up).
> Two dozen are 66GB, leaving over 180GB for other stuff. How much is
> enough for 'other stuff'?
Other people in the household may also want to stream something different, too
>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:18:40 -0500]:
>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 16:38:19 +0000 (UTC), Justin
>> <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:28:17 -0500]:
>>>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 08:54:09 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Internet radio's business model depends on piggybacking
>>>>>onto unlimited or high-limit data plans, both mobile and DSL/cable. Yet
>>>>>Sprint is the only major carrier still offering unlimited data.
>>>>
>>>>>Both AT&T and Comcast now limit data on their U-Verse and cable
>>>>>systems (though to a level that is high enough for audio if the
>>>>>capacity isn't used up for video).
>>>>
>>>> Comcast has had caps in place for years. Their current 250GB 'soft'
>>>> cap should be plenty for streaming a couple dozen movies monthly.
>>>
>>>Assuming you don't use your internet for anything else. Like the aforementioned
>>>pandora, or for downloading new operating systems, or games or upload
>>>photos to facebook or relatives, etc. etc.
>>
>> I wasn't assuming that.
>>
>> A typical movie streams (in HD) at less than 2 Mbps, but to be safe
>> I'll double that to 4Mbps. That same movie is about 90 minutes long.
>> Doing the math, that works out to less than 2.7GB per movie.
>
>Nope, from Netflix an HD stream is over 2Mbps, and most movies are 2 hours
>these days. Doing the math you can stream for about 4 hours a day.
As it turns out, I overstated the streaming bandwidth requirement.
Apparently, it's less than 2.8 Mbps in practice, rather than 4 Mbps,
which we could round up to 3 Mbps to facilitate the math. Dropping the
bitrate from 4Mbps to 3 Mbps while increasing the runtime from 90 to
120 minutes leaves us exactly where we started: about 2.64 GB per
movie.
Two movies a day, every day of the month, is certainly outside the
norm, but it's quite possible to do that and still have over 90 Gigs
available for other things. I'm not seeing the problem.
Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:55:12 -0500]:
> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 17:41:09 +0000 (UTC), Justin
> <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
>>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:18:40 -0500]:
>>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 16:38:19 +0000 (UTC), Justin
>>> <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:28:17 -0500]:
>>>>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 08:54:09 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Internet radio's business model depends on piggybacking
>>>>>>onto unlimited or high-limit data plans, both mobile and DSL/cable. Yet
>>>>>>Sprint is the only major carrier still offering unlimited data.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Both AT&T and Comcast now limit data on their U-Verse and cable
>>>>>>systems (though to a level that is high enough for audio if the
>>>>>>capacity isn't used up for video).
>>>>>
>>>>> Comcast has had caps in place for years. Their current 250GB 'soft'
>>>>> cap should be plenty for streaming a couple dozen movies monthly.
>>>>
>>>>Assuming you don't use your internet for anything else. Like the aforementioned
>>>>pandora, or for downloading new operating systems, or games or upload
>>>>photos to facebook or relatives, etc. etc.
>>>
>>> I wasn't assuming that.
>>>
>>> A typical movie streams (in HD) at less than 2 Mbps, but to be safe
>>> I'll double that to 4Mbps. That same movie is about 90 minutes long.
>>> Doing the math, that works out to less than 2.7GB per movie.
>>
>>Nope, from Netflix an HD stream is over 2Mbps, and most movies are 2 hours
>>these days. Doing the math you can stream for about 4 hours a day.
>
> As it turns out, I overstated the streaming bandwidth requirement.
> Apparently, it's less than 2.8 Mbps in practice, rather than 4 Mbps,
> which we could round up to 3 Mbps to facilitate the math. Dropping the
> bitrate from 4Mbps to 3 Mbps while increasing the runtime from 90 to
> 120 minutes leaves us exactly where we started: about 2.64 GB per
> movie.
>
> Two movies a day, every day of the month, is certainly outside the
> norm, but it's quite possible to do that and still have over 90 Gigs
> available for other things. I'm not seeing the problem.
Even at those numbers, Mum & dad watching one show, kids watching another
and it's easy to push into that bandwidth cap.
Then there's the whole idea of the stay at home parent watching their
stories during the daytime.
>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:55:12 -0500]:
>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 17:41:09 +0000 (UTC), Justin
>> <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:18:40 -0500]:
>>>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 16:38:19 +0000 (UTC), Justin
>>>> <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:28:17 -0500]:
>>>>>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 08:54:09 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Internet radio's business model depends on piggybacking
>>>>>>>onto unlimited or high-limit data plans, both mobile and DSL/cable. Yet
>>>>>>>Sprint is the only major carrier still offering unlimited data.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Both AT&T and Comcast now limit data on their U-Verse and cable
>>>>>>>systems (though to a level that is high enough for audio if the
>>>>>>>capacity isn't used up for video).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Comcast has had caps in place for years. Their current 250GB 'soft'
>>>>>> cap should be plenty for streaming a couple dozen movies monthly.
>>>>>
>>>>>Assuming you don't use your internet for anything else. Like the aforementioned
>>>>>pandora, or for downloading new operating systems, or games or upload
>>>>>photos to facebook or relatives, etc. etc.
>>>>
>>>> I wasn't assuming that.
>>>>
>>>> A typical movie streams (in HD) at less than 2 Mbps, but to be safe
>>>> I'll double that to 4Mbps. That same movie is about 90 minutes long.
>>>> Doing the math, that works out to less than 2.7GB per movie.
>>>
>>>Nope, from Netflix an HD stream is over 2Mbps, and most movies are 2 hours
>>>these days. Doing the math you can stream for about 4 hours a day.
>>
>> As it turns out, I overstated the streaming bandwidth requirement.
>> Apparently, it's less than 2.8 Mbps in practice, rather than 4 Mbps,
>> which we could round up to 3 Mbps to facilitate the math. Dropping the
>> bitrate from 4Mbps to 3 Mbps while increasing the runtime from 90 to
>> 120 minutes leaves us exactly where we started: about 2.64 GB per
>> movie.
>>
>> Two movies a day, every day of the month, is certainly outside the
>> norm, but it's quite possible to do that and still have over 90 Gigs
>> available for other things. I'm not seeing the problem.
>
>Even at those numbers, Mum & dad watching one show, kids watching another
>and it's easy to push into that bandwidth cap.
I think you're stretching things a bit. How many adult couples have
time to watch an average of a full length movie every day, and of
those, how many have kids who are also allowed to watch an average of
a full length movie every day? (Ignoring the complete lack of
parenting for the moment.) Of those, how many will burn up the
additional 90GB of monthly cap, and of those, how many will do it
month after month and not just once in awhile? Are we at zero yet?
>Then there's the whole idea of the stay at home parent watching their
>stories during the daytime.
Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 22:08:43 -0500]:
> On Tue, 26 Jul 2011 02:42:10 +0000 (UTC), Justin
> <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
>>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:55:12 -0500]:
>>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 17:41:09 +0000 (UTC), Justin
>>> <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:18:40 -0500]:
>>>>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 16:38:19 +0000 (UTC), Justin
>>>>> <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:28:17 -0500]:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 08:54:09 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Internet radio's business model depends on piggybacking
>>>>>>>>onto unlimited or high-limit data plans, both mobile and DSL/cable. Yet
>>>>>>>>Sprint is the only major carrier still offering unlimited data.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Both AT&T and Comcast now limit data on their U-Verse and cable
>>>>>>>>systems (though to a level that is high enough for audio if the
>>>>>>>>capacity isn't used up for video).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Comcast has had caps in place for years. Their current 250GB 'soft'
>>>>>>> cap should be plenty for streaming a couple dozen movies monthly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Assuming you don't use your internet for anything else. Like the aforementioned
>>>>>>pandora, or for downloading new operating systems, or games or upload
>>>>>>photos to facebook or relatives, etc. etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wasn't assuming that.
>>>>>
>>>>> A typical movie streams (in HD) at less than 2 Mbps, but to be safe
>>>>> I'll double that to 4Mbps. That same movie is about 90 minutes long.
>>>>> Doing the math, that works out to less than 2.7GB per movie.
>>>>
>>>>Nope, from Netflix an HD stream is over 2Mbps, and most movies are 2 hours
>>>>these days. Doing the math you can stream for about 4 hours a day.
>>>
>>> As it turns out, I overstated the streaming bandwidth requirement.
>>> Apparently, it's less than 2.8 Mbps in practice, rather than 4 Mbps,
>>> which we could round up to 3 Mbps to facilitate the math. Dropping the
>>> bitrate from 4Mbps to 3 Mbps while increasing the runtime from 90 to
>>> 120 minutes leaves us exactly where we started: about 2.64 GB per
>>> movie.
>>>
>>> Two movies a day, every day of the month, is certainly outside the
>>> norm, but it's quite possible to do that and still have over 90 Gigs
>>> available for other things. I'm not seeing the problem.
>>
>>Even at those numbers, Mum & dad watching one show, kids watching another
>>and it's easy to push into that bandwidth cap.
>
> I think you're stretching things a bit. How many adult couples have
> time to watch an average of a full length movie every day, and of
I know we do, two hours of TV a night is pretty easy. Netflix does a lot
more than just movies.
> those, how many have kids who are also allowed to watch an average of
> a full length movie every day? (Ignoring the complete lack of
> parenting for the moment.) Of those, how many will burn up the
I know of several parents that allow their kids to watch the apparently
large selection of childrens programming Netflix offers. Have you never
seen a 6 year old watch the same movie, say Toy Story, three or four
times in a row?
> additional 90GB of monthly cap, and of those, how many will do it
> month after month and not just once in awhile? Are we at zero yet?
Nope.
It's EASY to hit that cap with cloud services. Download podcasts,
download music, download video games. One video game can be over 10GB
Youtube, facebook, pandora....
Then there's the big gun, online backup. Since these caps are total bandwidth
>>Then there's the whole idea of the stay at home parent watching their
>>stories during the daytime.
>
> Get'em a DVR.
>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 22:08:43 -0500]:
>> On Tue, 26 Jul 2011 02:42:10 +0000 (UTC), Justin
>> <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:55:12 -0500]:
>>>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 17:41:09 +0000 (UTC), Justin
>>>> <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:18:40 -0500]:
>>>>>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 16:38:19 +0000 (UTC), Justin
>>>>>> <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Paul Miner wrote on [Mon, 25 Jul 2011 11:28:17 -0500]:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 08:54:09 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Internet radio's business model depends on piggybacking
>>>>>>>>>onto unlimited or high-limit data plans, both mobile and DSL/cable. Yet
>>>>>>>>>Sprint is the only major carrier still offering unlimited data.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Both AT&T and Comcast now limit data on their U-Verse and cable
>>>>>>>>>systems (though to a level that is high enough for audio if the
>>>>>>>>>capacity isn't used up for video).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Comcast has had caps in place for years. Their current 250GB 'soft'
>>>>>>>> cap should be plenty for streaming a couple dozen movies monthly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Assuming you don't use your internet for anything else. Like the aforementioned
>>>>>>>pandora, or for downloading new operating systems, or games or upload
>>>>>>>photos to facebook or relatives, etc. etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wasn't assuming that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A typical movie streams (in HD) at less than 2 Mbps, but to be safe
>>>>>> I'll double that to 4Mbps. That same movie is about 90 minutes long.
>>>>>> Doing the math, that works out to less than 2.7GB per movie.
>>>>>
>>>>>Nope, from Netflix an HD stream is over 2Mbps, and most movies are 2 hours
>>>>>these days. Doing the math you can stream for about 4 hours a day.
>>>>
>>>> As it turns out, I overstated the streaming bandwidth requirement.
>>>> Apparently, it's less than 2.8 Mbps in practice, rather than 4 Mbps,
>>>> which we could round up to 3 Mbps to facilitate the math. Dropping the
>>>> bitrate from 4Mbps to 3 Mbps while increasing the runtime from 90 to
>>>> 120 minutes leaves us exactly where we started: about 2.64 GB per
>>>> movie.
>>>>
>>>> Two movies a day, every day of the month, is certainly outside the
>>>> norm, but it's quite possible to do that and still have over 90 Gigs
>>>> available for other things. I'm not seeing the problem.
>>>
>>>Even at those numbers, Mum & dad watching one show, kids watching another
>>>and it's easy to push into that bandwidth cap.
>>
>> I think you're stretching things a bit. How many adult couples have
>> time to watch an average of a full length movie every day, and of
>
>I know we do, two hours of TV a night is pretty easy. Netflix does a lot
>more than just movies.
>
>
>> those, how many have kids who are also allowed to watch an average of
>> a full length movie every day? (Ignoring the complete lack of
>> parenting for the moment.) Of those, how many will burn up the
>
>I know of several parents that allow their kids to watch the apparently
>large selection of childrens programming Netflix offers. Have you never
>seen a 6 year old watch the same movie, say Toy Story, three or four
>times in a row?
>
>
>> additional 90GB of monthly cap, and of those, how many will do it
>> month after month and not just once in awhile? Are we at zero yet?
>
>Nope.
>
>It's EASY to hit that cap with cloud services. Download podcasts,
>download music, download video games. One video game can be over 10GB
>Youtube, facebook, pandora....
>
>Then there's the big gun, online backup. Since these caps are total bandwidth
>
>
>>>Then there's the whole idea of the stay at home parent watching their
>>>stories during the daytime.
>>
>> Get'em a DVR.
>
>If you have cut the cable and only have internet?
You didn't sway me with your ever changing argument, but you certainly
wore me out. ;-)
If this rumor is true, it great new to current iphone owners on
different phone carriers. We had our bill job some when Verizon was
allowed to sell iphones. With the addition of Sprint to the iphone
market, there are sure to be plenty of phone plan price drops in the
future.
Re: Sprint to get the iPhone 
Linear Mode
