Verizon looking at non-unlimited plans for 4G data, will use LTE for voice by 2012
By Chris Ziegler 
posted May 27th 2010 12:28PM
posted May 27th 2010 12:28PM
On a happier note, McAdam said that the company expects to be using its LTE network for voice by 2012, which comes just after its first volley of LTE-capable handsets in early 2011. He also mentioned that at least some of those devices will be shown off at CES 2011, and naturally, we'll be there -- not just to check out the phones, but to raise some hell at the notion that unlimited data is a thing of the past. At this rate, how are we ever going to run the Engadget servers on a wireless connection?
Sprint, data unlimited, the way it should be!
Possible solution: $30/month for 10GB, since LTE is less expensive for Verizon, and unlimited for $40/month - that's what Clearwire charges for its 4G unlimited data plan.
Pricing network access based on actual bandwidth usage is the only sensible way to do it.
Why should voice data be priced completely differently than any other data?
Why should people be charged based purely on how many active devices they have?
Those pricing systems are just crude approximations for what is really being bought/sold: network connectivity and bandwidth. People should pay for what they use, companies should get paid for what they sell, and providers should compete to give us the best rates and quality of service.
I'm shocked Sprint didn't already do this with WiMax.
Peoples of the world-errm... this website. I have a solution! Switch to AT&T. If you don't like their phones, get an unlocked version if whatever it is that you do want. It's that simple, all problems solved.
@Good Idea Cdma is literally years ahead of Gsm in the U.S. Most of the people I know with iPhones hate their service, especially here in So Cal where everything is so spread out.. Maps matter
I actually think this would be fine if they set a realistic number on the cap and not something stupidly small like 5GB. We are moving to data, completely no doubt about it and if you try to then tell me 5GB is what the majority of us use then you are not thinking far enough IMO. I know spectrum is limited but 5GB is such a small number even today that in 2014 it seems even more stupid. As more stuff goes online so does the need for 24 hrs data access. I can envision a stage where a normal user would consume 8-12 GB without even using YouTube heavily.
spectrum STILL limited? you speak of it as if that is gonna change in the future.... spectrum HAS BEEN AND WILL BE always limited... get your facts straight
Why not call a spade a spade?
As the article clearly states, the reality even today is that the "unlimited" plan is not truly unlimited. It is actually only a 5GB bucket that is being called unlimited to make it more palatable to consumers. AT&T's situation with the iPhone is the same - it is actually a 5GB bucket. Calling something unlimited when it really isn't is a bit shady in my books.
I would much prefer that companies like Verizon and AT&T be more upfront and honest and call the plan what it really is - a 5GB data bucket that will serve the needs of the majority of users. At least then you know what you're getting.
Wouldn't you rather that they be more truthful about what you're really getting? I know I would.
As long as the price stays the same, why do you care what it's called? They've given no explicit indication that the price would increase. Everybody's just making wild assumptions that it would.
I say, call a spade a spade.
Just what is Verizon trying to do here, this is ridiculous and I LIKE Verizon.
HHAHAHAHAHAHAH
F*CK VERIZON
Man, i hate everything about that company...crappy offerings, crappy customer service, crappy attitude, and overall crappy everything. these guys will bend over backwards to screw customers over.
And they are still gaining subscribers? Because they been successful at branding, NOT at their services.
YUCK
Actually Verizon's service is better, customer service is better and phone offerings better than Sprint's. This is why Verizon beats Sprint.
Sprint is only popular with ghetto people who can't afford a real cell service.
@Elranzer The proper response would have been no response and then hit the - button.
The free "market" does not regulate itself, if one of the carriers can get away with greed the other does as well, verizon raised etf, so did att, thats how they play the game
For those who want to learn a bit more about how spectrum affects the way operators can offer service, may we humbly suggest our latest (free!) report on the subject:
http://bit.ly/c0tF34
They can charge whatever they want. I sure as hell ain't giving them MY MONEY.
Why not just create speed tiers, like DSL and cable do? 3 - 6 Mbps for $40, 600Kbps - 1.4 Mbps for $30, less than 600 Kbps for $20.
I don't like caps. Once they are in place, it'll be difficult to remove them even when they're no longer necessary. It'll threaten future online businesses and access to cellular networks.
Just throttle users who are using the connection the most when other users get on and need to use it. People who use it less should be able to get their max speeds when they do use it. People who use it more should get max speeds when no one is using a connection, but be throttled when other users hop on. As speeds and capacity increase, you could bump up the thresholds to match so that the system still works fairly.
Cutting people's connections or charging them fees for going over a cap is ridiculous though. It's outdated and unnecessary. I'd rather be throttled then get a surprise $1,000 bill for going over a cap.
It'd be nice if we could knock $10 off each of those plans, but you'd actually have to have real competition to have that.
Ha, Ha... I was on Verizon for two years and hated it. Service was horrible, they nickle and dimmed me on EVERYTHING and the bastards still charged me an ETF even though 1) I used my own equipment and 2) I completed the f'ing contract. I would never go back to them.
@malexandria1
I also didn't like Verizon. A couple times my bill went from $40 to $100 from overages. My cell phone is my only phone and I went over while looking for a job. I usually use less than 200 minutes a month.
With AT&T, I have 3,000+ rollover minutes and the cheapest plan. I will never go over my minutes, even if I do have a month where I make more calls than usual. AT&T coverage is better at my house than Verizon as well.
I know AT&T is horrible in some places, like San Francisco. I experienced it first hand, I had 5 bars in downtown San Francisco and couldn't make a single call or use data at all. I think it's a capacity issue rather than a coverage issue. Where I live though (don't live in SF, was there on vacation), coverage and capacity are great. I don't have any problems making calls or using data.
@bernardino Yep, I have the same experience with AT&T it's great where I am and the only service (and TMobile) that actually works in my house but on those 3 or 4 trips I take a year it's completely useless once I leave my area. When I had Verizon it was the opposite horrible in my area and fine when I traveled.
sucks for you, glad im with Sprint
I'm no lawyer but I really wish we could get a huge lawsuit going against these phone companies. There has got to be some sort of price gouging going on here. Please don't sayouTou don't have to buy it" because while a cell phone isn't essential to everyone, it is for many people and most phone plans are similar in price (Sprint has pretty spotty coverage where I live).
I remeber research that was done into sending 1 text message And it was somewhere in the neighborhood of a fraction of a cent. Of course this probably doesn't include marketing cost etc. but I'd like to see a more extensive study done.
Sorry for the rant. :-/
"Buckets of MB?" Surely he must be joking. It's not as if VZW's existing plans are truly unlimited, they all have 5GB caps.
Fact: Verizon once looked up the word Unlimited in a dictionary so they could define their plans. Unfortunately, the dictionary was an "opposite day" dictionary that AT&T got them as a gag gift.
It listed the antonym of whatever word it was for.
Damn it Verizon...
And for people who think At&t wont follow.. you're dead wrong.
I'd be so surprised if they didn't.
Buckets!? These goons think they're slick huh? Well see when 40 million ppl leave them for sprint and Tmo.
I wanna know the name of the dumbass who said "whe should have buckets of data to sell!" at the executive meeting. Then I want the name of the guy who said "ok"!
@P Z
Actually it's a great idea. I know in other countries you can pre-purchase something like 10 gig to last you half a year or even a year. Considering more and more devices are going online, I do not want to have to pay $200 in so-called unlimited plans for each device. All regardless of the fact that I may only use a gig on one device, will 7 gig on another.
@JKL
Nope. There are apps that constantly use data and remain to do so unless you're phone is completely shut off.
Like some of the other post stated earlier. Data service is similar to internet and cable, not water and utilites. U pay a certain amount for a certain qualtiy (such as premium/HD channels, internet usage, and website uses such as porn sites, etc. Then when you subscribe u get to watch it as much as you please until you don't pay your bill next month. It would be ridiculous to pay for HBO then only be able to watch it for even 100 hours a month. It would kill the experience.
And more importantly what makes Verizon think that they can change our plans so drastically without serious backlash? They don't own us and they're not smarter than we are. They are not going to set some trend here. They will lose customers for this. Period. If they cant support 4g and its feature then they have no business selling devices that have it. Regardless of the competition or not.
@P Z
Cellular networks are not like some home broadband connection. Networks neither have the capacity nor the flexibility to be able to provide everyone with unlimited data. You are also forgetting that the current so-called unlimited is actually 5 gig period.
That is not the point of tier pricing anyway. Not everyone needs 5 gig, so why should they pay for it? I actually do not even have data because I do not want or need to pay for the unlimited [5 gig]. In order to acquire data only, you are currently looking at $60 per month. Tier pricing allows more people who currently do not subscribe to any data service to use it.
The pricing model isn't is stupid as you guys think, after all most telcos around the world use it. US carriers are hardly renowned for value. They're a ripoff actually.
Why all the bitching? We do not all need so-called unlimited, while others want more than just 5 gig. What's stupid is the current 250mb or so-called unlimited. Personally, I need 1 gig for a phone and would prefer more for my netbook. These plans work well overseas and considering their cell networks are 100 times better value than ours and faster, I'll take their lead for once over our faux unlimited .
Hahahahahahahahahaha this ceo is so awesome for his crazy sayings. Come on last qtr verizon raked in $1bil+ profit, was that not enough? Lol
Ok a quick check with a sprint tech(outside tower guy) who is my neighbor explained to me that 1gb of 3g costs $1-1.50 to transmit over the network. 4g will be way less then a $1. Voice calls and texts are fractions of a penny. He then stated that its not the network its the backhauls that cost the majority of the money and where the real speed is for the network. While sprint is building out its 4g and existing network they are increasing their backhauls to 3x what it is now. Not sure how much verizons cost are but they can't be that far off.
Anyone know verizons cost on this matter?
@BrianlikeshisMoment,
Also not sure taking a step backwards is the right approach. It will ultimately lead to the consumer choosing what they think is best, but going by that the general consumer is not that bright. Oh well to each their own. I'm happy with my service and my other family members who have verizon are happy also, and that's what matters most.
I think that was what I just said. The network isn't equipped for what they are selling.
@TechBlogger
More impotantly 4g aint as much a hassle as 3g. So charging people diffrently or even changing the method of charging is a money grab period.
verizons limits = fail.
what a rip off!
they'll never beat sprints $80 EVO 4G plan... It's that simple. It's actually only 70 with most phones. Sprints got the best deal going by far.
If they put a cap that's well above the average to restrict people who are downloading an insane amount per month that's fine. I'm sure it's costing a pretty penny to keep their plans unlimited for those people. And if you want to have your data usage work in a tiered pricing that's cool too. If you use less then 1GB you pay this much, 1GB to 5GB is this much, if you go over this amount you'll pay a pretty penny, etc.
Then problem? AT&T nor Verizon nor Sprint nor T-Mobile is ever going to do things reasonably. Just like all these cable and fiber ISPs who are putting unfair caps on monthly allowances. This will be a disaster and consumers will be screwed over for it. Period.
Verizon can suck it
One notable aspect is how Cablevision was deploying WiFi access points in NYC (as the LightPath fiber network runs through the City) for their suburban customers, some of which also have residences in NYC, thus do not need local TWC/RCN/Fios internet service; as of late, TWC and Verizon made friends with Cablevision (!) saying they would share access points in the MSA.This in turn might somewhat bridge the gap for WiMax & LTE coverage on WiFi capable phones, at least for steady locations.
At least for the past 5 years, it was convenient for the ones with several homes to rely on mobile broadband, rather than having to pay for internet service in all locations. Granted the speed & latency was not ideal, so that's one niche for WiMax & LTE...
I've been telling everyone this is coming. Tethering is going to be the norm in the future and Verizon (and others) will have limits on data (or tiered plans). Not sure how the feds will react to this, but we shall see.
I love everyone's outrage, without knowing remotely close to the full details.
I personally don't even come close to the 5GB on my current "unlimited" Verizon plan, yet I'm paying just as much as the person who does. That's ridiculous, not the fact that they might give me a better option than the unlimited or nothing option I have now.
It should be, you get what you pay for. What if you went to the gas station, and you had to pay for 20 gallons of gas, even if you only needed 10, or your tank could only hold 15? No one knows what these "buckets" will even cost, so it is ridiculous for anyone to jump to conclusions.
@ckeegan I should add that it will make a lot of sense if their largest "bucket" is equal to the current price of the "unlimited" plan. Obviously Verizon knows they couldn't justify it otherwise.
It doesn't matter. If Google has their way (which they do) everything will be free. You can't charge people money that they do not have.
Open Source is growing for a reason. Raise the fees and create your own obsolescence.
if they cap my data plan, im leaving to sprint!