4 ms·

I like T-Mobile's no BS approach. I had CLEAR for less than a month because of their throttling. Used it for a week or two and then loaned it to a friend whil

I like T-Mobile's no BS approach. I had CLEAR for less than a month because of their throttling. Used it for a week or two and then loaned it to a friend while I was traveling for work. When I got it back, it was throttled so severely I could no longer log into gmail! It was slower than the EVDO modem it had replaced. Throttling is one thing, claiming 5G cap and then they'll throttle you but it'll be useable is another. It was unusable.

mikeash 12y ago
Clear is especially egregious, as their advertising is (or at least was, when I had it) explicitly geared towards using it as a replacement for a wired home broadband connection, and touting how it could be used for streaming video and all sorts of other bandwidth-intensive uses. But they throttled me into oblivion after a couple of weeks of using it like a home connection, then gave me the runaround for weeks because none of their techs had been informed of their throttling policies. We just need truth in advertising. Do what you will, just tell me what it is, and I can figure out the rest. I personally like metered wireless plans because I know that my incentives align with those of the provider, and I'm comfortable with the overage charges. If unlimited-with-throttling is better for others, great! But don't try to sell me "unlimited, period" and then not deliver.
adevine 12y ago
Agreed. If there is ever a shining example of why competition is important and mono/duopolies are bad, take a look at T-Mobile. Can you imagine if the DOJ let the AT-T/TMobile merger go through? And given that history, how they are even considering letting the Comcast/TimeWarner merger go through is amazing to me.
driverdan 12y ago
You have to use a TON of bandwidth for CLEAR to throttle you. The only time I've been throttled was when I streamed Netflix for about 8 hours straight. I've transferred GBs/day many times without throttling. That said, they are not transparent about it. They refused to call it throttling or even agree that they were throttling me. They used misleading language like "fair-share for the antenna you're on."

mikeash 12y ago

Clear is especially egregious, as their advertising is (or at least was, when I had it) explicitly geared towards using it as a replacement for a wired home broadband connection, and touting how it could be used for streaming video and all sorts of other bandwidth-intensive uses. But they throttled me into oblivion after a couple of weeks of using it like a home connection, then gave me the runaround for weeks because none of their techs had been informed of their throttling policies. We just need truth in advertising. Do what you will, just tell me what it is, and I can figure out the rest. I personally like metered wireless plans because I know that my incentives align with those of the provider, and I'm comfortable with the overage charges. If unlimited-with-throttling is better for others, great! But don't try to sell me "unlimited, period" and then not deliver.

adevine 12y ago

Agreed. If there is ever a shining example of why competition is important and mono/duopolies are bad, take a look at T-Mobile. Can you imagine if the DOJ let the AT-T/TMobile merger go through? And given that history, how they are even considering letting the Comcast/TimeWarner merger go through is amazing to me.

driverdan 12y ago

You have to use a TON of bandwidth for CLEAR to throttle you. The only time I've been throttled was when I streamed Netflix for about 8 hours straight. I've transferred GBs/day many times without throttling. That said, they are not transparent about it. They refused to call it throttling or even agree that they were throttling me. They used misleading language like "fair-share for the antenna you're on."