AT&T Drops unlimited data plans. What were you saying about internet radio?

[gr8oldies]

Well, AT&T is the first to drop its unlimited data plan and go to a tiered system. Guess watch out how much internet radio you stream. What were some of you saying about internet radio cleaning traditional radio's clock; and that "everyone" will be listening to micro-niche programming from one of a million kids in their basement?

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0216207120100602?type=marketsNews

 

[PTBoardOp94]

It had to happen. AT&T's network was buckling under all that data.

 

[Roger That]

I agree that Internet Radio won't be any kind of savior, and did even before this news. But it doesn't change the fact that the traditional radio model is broken.

 

[SirRoxalot]

A couple of things to remember:

1. iPhone & iPad only use cellular service if you're not connected to a Wi-fi network. If you're in a place with free Wi-fi, you can avoid using your cell access.

2. Audio requires very little bandwidth compared to video. If you're streaming HD video, you could eat up your monthly allocation in hours. A high-quality audio stream (96Kb) would give you nearly 8 days of continuous audio before you hit your 2GB allocation.

 

[nmoore6676]

I have been trying to tell all of my techie friends streaming everything the possibly can that this day was going to get here. For all of those who see WiFi and WiMax as viable alternatives to terrestrial radio well here is the day of reckoning. It can also be down the road for wired users who use lots of bandwidth. Yes we can do it but there will be costs while radio (and broadcast TV) is still free, well except for those annoying Progressive ads with Flo.

 

[turkeydance]

hey!
let's leave Flo outta dis!

 

[SirRoxalot]

The "day of reckoning" has little to do with wi-fi or wimax. The "day of reckoning" has to do with streaming from cellular towers. Wi-fi, in particular, is a short-range technology that extends a wired connection - typically with plenty of bandwidth - to a relative handful of users within line-of-sight. Wimax covers a greater distance, with more potential consumers, and isn't likely to be used in densely populated areas.

The issue for cellular is that there's a limit to the number of cell towers, or panel antennae, that cellular companies are allowed to erect in densely populated areas. Apple is pushing high-bandwidth technologies with their iPhone and iPad, and AT&T can't keep up with the cellular bandwidth demands on a system that was originally designed for low-bandwidth voice technologies. And, to top it off, the next generation iPhone will offer multi-tasking, so you can talk or text while streaming music or video or checking your e-mail.

The biggest joke is that cell providers charge EXTRA for texting. Texting uses very little bandwidth - miniscule compared to streaming video - so you'd think that the cell providers would encourage texting.

AT&T's approach is a way of "encouraging" smart phone users to connect to nearby wi-fi networks to avoid using cellular connections. People who were about to unplug their high-speed Internet at home and share their cellular connections with their computers are going to have to rethink that idea if AT&T is their provider.

 

[joep]

This might explain AT&T's decision to allow Skype calls over 3G. Interesting.

 

[nuff_said]

...it doesn't change the fact that the traditional radio model is broken.

I agree. Don't cheer too loudly about this, as it won't save radio. If someone despises listening to traditional radio, this news is not going to mean that traditional radio will gain another set of ears. People like myself who stream internet radio in their cars via cell phones will simply switch providers (I have Verizon, who doesn't have the network problems AT&T have). When/if all providers decide to put limits on their data plans, other means of getting by will be explored. The bottom line is that if something (radio) is broken, it's going to stay broken until it gets fixed.

And, don't forget, AM/FM radio stations benefit by having online streams as well. There's a whole other opportunity for radio with that audience. News like this hurts those growth opportunities as well. For the record, I stream traditional radio stations from other markets on my phone because there's nothing I like on my local dial. So "internet radio" isn't all bad... many times it is one and the same as traditional radio stations, just delivered via a different medium. Let's not shoot ourselves in the foot over it.

 

[SirRoxalot]

I think the folks who'll get hurt most by this will be Apple - who sold AT&T exclusive rights to their iPhone/iPad platform. Everybody else stands to benefit until the droid platform starts stressing their delivery systems - and they have time to beef up their systems in the meantime.

 

[Chuck]

I think the folks who'll get hurt most by this will be Apple - who sold AT&T exclusive rights to their iPhone/iPad platform. Everybody else stands to benefit until the droid platform starts stressing their delivery systems - and they have time to beef up their systems in the meantime.

I've been told that Verizon will be selling the iPhone very shortly. Of course there are a lot of other Smart Phones out there that do more or less the same thing. I'm using a Palm Pre which works just fine to listen to Internet radio in my car, and elsewhere.

You may a recall that the FCC took back the upper UHF TV channels when we made the transition to digital TV. Now they are asking TV broadcasters to "voluntarily" surrender their new channel allotments. I'm not sure how successful the Commission will be with that plan, since NAB and most broadcasters are not taking the news lying down.

Whatever happens I'm pretty sure you see those available frequencies (700 MHz and up as well as maybe some "surrendered" channels) occupied by various technologies that coincidentally provide Internet connectivity. It is only a matter of time. New and better methods to connect will to come on the market, since demand is there.

Good radio broadcasters shouldn't be too worried though, assuming they actually provide something people want to listen to. The method of delivery may be changing, but the product (Broadcasting) will survive. Most listeners really don't care how the signal gets to them.

 

[davideduardo]

Wimax covers a greater distance, with more potential consumers, and isn't likely to be used in densely populated areas.

WiMax is rolling out nationally, principally in large metro areas, not rural ones.

 

[davideduardo]

A couple of things to remember:

1. iPhone & iPad only use cellular service if you're not connected to a Wi-fi network. If you're in a place with free Wi-fi, you can avoid using your cell access.

Unless you are in one of the very few femcell ATT markets and have a femtocell (tradmarked as Microcell) adapter in your home, the telephone portion of the iPhone never uses wifi. Only the data part can do this.

 

[TheBigA]

Don't cheer too loudly about this, as it won't save radio. If someone despises listening to traditional radio, this news is not going to mean that traditional radio will gain another set of ears.

Traditional radio doesn't need another set of ears. It has 92% of the public already.

 

[nuff_said]

Traditional radio doesn't need another set of ears. It has 92% of the public already.

...and this kind of thinking is exactly why radio's audience is decreasing. Just because you put your head in the sand doesn't make a problem go away.

 

[TheBigA]

The fact is that radio's audience isn't decreasing. However it is sharing with other devices. And ironically, the most listened to internet stations happen to be the streams of terrestrial stations.

No one's head is in the sand. People who work in radio are aggressively programming and marketing their content, and it's working. Maybe you don't like it, but lots of other people do.

 

[TheBigA]

2. Audio requires very little bandwidth compared to video. If you're streaming HD video, you could eat up your monthly allocation in hours. A high-quality audio stream (96Kb) would give you nearly 8 days of continuous audio before you hit your 2GB allocation.

Here's what internet radio advocate Kurt Hanson says:

Just how much data does Net radio use? Well, Net radio was my primary use of data on my Sprint Palm Pre last month and I exceeded 200MB. That’s not too bad, though it puts me above AT&T’s cheaper data plan. But just the fact that limits exist may be enough to make users think twice about launching Internet radio applications.

 

[nuff_said]

The fact is that radio's audience isn't decreasing. However it is sharing with other devices. And ironically, the most listened to internet stations happen to be the streams of terrestrial stations.

You've just proven my point. More and more people are starting to listen to internet radio. Like I specifically said I do, many listen to streams of terrestrial stations. But, even this is considered "internet radio" simply because of the fact that the content delivery is through the internet. So my point was that this move by AT&T will also hurt these radio stations that stream on the internet, not just the person playing music from a computer in his basement.

 

[BRNout]

Just how much data does Net radio use? Well, Net radio was my primary use of data on my Sprint Palm Pre last month and I exceeded 200MB. That’s not too bad, though it puts me above AT&T’s cheaper data plan. But just the fact that limits exist may be enough to make users think twice about launching Internet radio applications.

In reading through this thread and through various articles on this subject, I've come to the conclusion that the biggest winner here is: Verizon Wireless. With Sprint, T-Mobile, U.S. Cellular and other providers following up. Many, many heavy users of streamed content will find AT&T's new plans too limiting and will flee like rats from a burning city.

Face it, providers like AT&T encourage heavy data consumption through advertising campaigns that showcase HD video, live games, music and other data intensive uses. Then, after selling people on the idea, AT&T whines about usage and raises the price.

Downloading audio streams doesn't involve all that much data when compared with many popular on-line applications. If you're tapping the ceiling with audio streaming or by downloading a few web pages a day, then that ceiling is set pretty low and many users will find their bills skyrocketing. Based on this, I think that AT&T is bending the truth in implying that 97% of users will see a lower bill. The only way that's going to be true is if a large chunk of users head over to Verizon and others, leaving customers who consume very little data.

Interesting also that AT&T just jacked their early cancellation fee way up too. They are looking like a less and less attractive alternative for my personal use. And I don't even have a smartphone *yet*.

 

[TheBigA]

In reading through this thread and through various articles on this subject, I've come to the conclusion that the biggest winner here is: Verizon Wireless.

For the time being. The other companies are investigating tiered charges.