5 ms·

T-Mobile US operates independently of Deutsche Telekom, almost like a totally different company that happens to have the same brand name. Being mostly independe

T-Mobile US operates independently of Deutsche Telekom, almost like a totally different company that happens to have the same brand name. Being mostly independent, TMUS have actually dropped a lot of the "heavy carrier" aspects. For instance: > Bandwidth caps. Trying to push Netflix and Google Video out of the network for promoting their on in-house service T-Mobile US actually gives you "free" low-quality Netflix and YouTube video streaming, without counting that against a subscribers data limit. http://www.t-mobile.com/offer/binge-on-streaming-video.html http://www.t-mobile.com/offer/binge-on-streaming-video.html --- T-Mobile US isn't the only example of this. "Virgin Mobile USA" is just a brand name slapped on prepaid Sprint phones. Besides licensing the brand, there has been no affiliation between Virgin Group UK and Sprint "Virgin Mobile USA" for many years now.

fapjacks 10y ago
"Free" here means very low quality streams. This is how T-Mobile is trying to create a bandwidth slow lane without violating the FCCs rules. This is "free" in the same sort of backhanded, conniving way that Facebook's "Free Basics" was free. Meaning, it's full of deceit and actually screwing people over.
- stonogo 10y ago
  Please explain how a system that saves the average user a ton of bandwidth quota, reduces network congestion, and is trivial to opt out of, is "actually screwing people over". I'm very pleased with their Netflix policy, because it means I don't have to bother with shitty hotel DSL for Netflix while I'm traveling.
  - slg 10y ago
    For most people it is good. That is the problem. The first challengers to Net Neutrality were always going to be deals like this that benefit people. Once a precedent is well established we will start seeing the industry making consumer unfriendly changes like moving Facebook or Netflix access to a higher cost plan. This is the drug dealers giving us our first hit for free.
  - mmanfrin 10y ago
    Because those services which TMobile has greenlit for free bandwidth now have a large competitive advantage over anyone else. Why would a user pay for, for instance, Seeso (a content streaming service) when they'd have to then pay even more for the data to stream it when they could just keep Netflix. It's nice getting the free data, but this is shoehorning in the 'nice' parts of breaking net neutrality before the other shoe drops.
    - mahyarm 10y ago
      If the carrier keeps it a free for all service to sign up as a general congestion incentive, like utility rebates to use more energy efficient light bulbs, then I can see it as a net positive.
      - mmanfrin 10y ago
        Except that it's the opposite of a congestion incentive... it's unmetering so people can use high-bandwidth using services. And if you're offering that any service can sign up to not be metered, then why even meter bandwidth at all?
    - roywiggins 10y ago
      As long as any video provider can sign up to the program without paying protection money (which, so far as I know, right now they can) I don't see the problem. Sure, it gives Netflix an advantage, but only over providers that haven't bothered to sign up to the scheme for some reason.
- r00fus 10y ago
  It's optional, and to be honest, even 480p looks good on my retina iPhone display. I agree that this weaker version of zero-rating is against Net Neutrality tenets.

fapjacks 10y ago

"Free" here means very low quality streams. This is how T-Mobile is trying to create a bandwidth slow lane without violating the FCCs rules. This is "free" in the same sort of backhanded, conniving way that Facebook's "Free Basics" was free. Meaning, it's full of deceit and actually screwing people over.

stonogo 10y ago
Please explain how a system that saves the average user a ton of bandwidth quota, reduces network congestion, and is trivial to opt out of, is "actually screwing people over". I'm very pleased with their Netflix policy, because it means I don't have to bother with shitty hotel DSL for Netflix while I'm traveling.
- slg 10y ago
  For most people it is good. That is the problem. The first challengers to Net Neutrality were always going to be deals like this that benefit people. Once a precedent is well established we will start seeing the industry making consumer unfriendly changes like moving Facebook or Netflix access to a higher cost plan. This is the drug dealers giving us our first hit for free.
- mmanfrin 10y ago
  Because those services which TMobile has greenlit for free bandwidth now have a large competitive advantage over anyone else. Why would a user pay for, for instance, Seeso (a content streaming service) when they'd have to then pay even more for the data to stream it when they could just keep Netflix. It's nice getting the free data, but this is shoehorning in the 'nice' parts of breaking net neutrality before the other shoe drops.
  - mahyarm 10y ago
    If the carrier keeps it a free for all service to sign up as a general congestion incentive, like utility rebates to use more energy efficient light bulbs, then I can see it as a net positive.
    - mmanfrin 10y ago
      Except that it's the opposite of a congestion incentive... it's unmetering so people can use high-bandwidth using services. And if you're offering that any service can sign up to not be metered, then why even meter bandwidth at all?
  - roywiggins 10y ago
    As long as any video provider can sign up to the program without paying protection money (which, so far as I know, right now they can) I don't see the problem. Sure, it gives Netflix an advantage, but only over providers that haven't bothered to sign up to the scheme for some reason.
r00fus 10y ago
It's optional, and to be honest, even 480p looks good on my retina iPhone display. I agree that this weaker version of zero-rating is against Net Neutrality tenets.