2/26/2012

[apple-iphone] Digest Number 2913

Messages In This Digest (17 Messages)

Messages

1a.

Re: iPhone user successfully sues AT&T over 3G throttling

Posted by: "4 Nikonkelly.com" kelly@nikonkelly.com   revkellytodd

Sat Feb 25, 2012 4:03 am (PST)



if enough take them to court and win, it will stop... if enough of
us leave ATT for Verizon and tell them why... it will stop, or
they will be out of business. they still need customers to stay
in business if I am not mistaken.
Kelly Todd
Http://www.nikonkelly.com

----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Sardone
To: apple-iphone@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 10:50 PM
Subject: Re: [apple-iphone] iPhone user successfully sues AT&T
over 3G throttling

They have not made a decision if they will appeal. So it does
not look like the $850 has been given. Also. I am not sure I saw
that throttling would stop.

On Feb 24, 2012, at 10:43 PM, "" <kelly@nikonkelly.com> wrote:

> This is exactly what I expected to happen. Right from the
start
> of this, I said that unlimited was to be unlimited no
> throttleing, no caps, no nothing now, I have to wonder, will
> ATT learn from this or will the rest of us have to do the same
> thing.
> Kelly Todd
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Brent
> To: Apple-iPhone Group
> Cc: Brent
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 6:22 PM
> Subject: [apple-iphone] iPhone user successfully sues AT&T
over
> 3G throttling
>
>
>
>
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/02/24/iphone_user_successfully_sues_att_over_3g_throttling.html
>
> Sent to you by Brent via Google Reader: iPhone user
successfully
> sues
> AT&T over 3G throttling via AppleInsider on 2/24/12
> In a California court ruling on Friday, an AT&T customer who
saw
> a
> reduction in his iPhone's download speed due to high usage,
was
> awarded
> $850 on claims that the telecom's throttling measures are
unfair
> to
> consumers.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4830 - Release Date:
02/24/12

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (11)
1b.

Re: iPhone user successfully sues AT&T over 3G throttling

Posted by: "Jim Saklad" jimdoc@me.com   jimdoc01

Sat Feb 25, 2012 4:03 am (PST)



> This is exactly what I expected to happen. Right from the start of this, I said that unlimited was to be unlimited no throttleing, no caps, no nothing now, I have to wonder, will ATT learn from this or will the rest of us have to do the same thing.
> Kelly Todd

Or will the decision be reversed by the courts because there is no contract violation here?

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@me.com

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (11)
1c.

Re: iPhone user successfully sues AT&T over 3G throttling

Posted by: "Jon Kreisler" jonkreisler@gmail.com   jonkreisler

Sat Feb 25, 2012 8:25 am (PST)



AT&T contracts specifically state there is no guaranteed service level,
however, to deliberately sabotage a customer's ability to use the service
is another matter entirely.
Jon

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 11:03 PM, Jim Saklad <jimdoc@me.com> wrote:

> **
>
>
> > This is exactly what I expected to happen. Right from the start of this,
> I said that unlimited was to be unlimited no throttleing, no caps, no
> nothing now, I have to wonder, will ATT learn from this or will the rest of
> us have to do the same thing.
> > Kelly Todd
>
> Or will the decision be reversed by the courts because there is no
> contract violation here?
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@me.com
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (11)
1d.

Re: iPhone user successfully sues AT&T over 3G throttling

Posted by: "Kelly@nikonkelly" kelly@nikonkelly.com   revkellytodd

Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:37 am (PST)



That is the whole point Jon.

Rev. Kelly Todd
Sent from my iPad

On Feb 25, 2012, at 11:11 AM, Jon Kreisler <jonkreisler@gmail.com> wrote:

> AT&T contracts specifically state there is no guaranteed service level,
> however, to deliberately sabotage a customer's ability to use the service
> is another matter entirely.
> Jon
>

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (11)
1e.

Re: iPhone user successfully sues AT&T over 3G throttling

Posted by: "AnneL" shadow484@comcast.net   alogston

Sat Feb 25, 2012 12:18 pm (PST)



> however, to deliberately sabotage a customer's ability to use the service
> is another matter entirely.

I haven't read the court's full decision, but I would imagine that it's not
the throttling itself that caused the ruling, but throttling an "unlimited"
customer at a lower level than people on tiered plans are allowed to use
unrestricted. I imagine that if AT&T established their "top 5%" number and
then throttled *all* data users at the same data point, the court's decision
might have been different. I imagine it's the fact that the unlimited users
are singled out for throttling at a threshold that caused the ruling. If
"unlimited" users are throttled more tightly than tiered plan users, then
that constitutes a limitation since it's not being applied across the board.

At this point, as I see it, AT&T has four options:

1. Appeal the ruling and fight it out in court, which means either AT&T
wins and nothing changes, or the customer wins and AT&T is stuck with the
other choices below

2. Stop throttling unlimited plan users at lower thresholds than the
highest level tiered plan

3. Pick an arbitrary "top 5%" level and throttle everybody, regardless of
plan, when they reach that level

4. Cancel the unlimited plans altogether and force customers to go to a
tiered plan.

Since there's only one outcome in four that ends well for me, as an
unlimited user, chances are that when all the dust clears I'll end up
jumping ship to another carrier, likely Verizon, who also throttles, but
much more reasonably -- they only throttle those using a particular tower
when THAT tower becomes congested, and they stop throttling as soon as the
congestion eases, usually a matter of hours or even minutes, rather than for
the rest of the billing cycle as AT&T does.

Anne

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (11)
1f.

Re: iPhone user successfully sues AT&T over 3G throttling

Posted by: "chris.magill1959@att.net" chris.magill1959@att.net   acmagill2000

Sat Feb 25, 2012 6:41 pm (PST)



In California I didn't think small claims court decisions could be challenged.

Chris

----- Original Message -----
From: Kelly@nikonkelly
To: apple-iphone@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 9:34 AM
Subject: Re: [apple-iphone] iPhone user successfully sues AT&T over 3G throttling

That is the whole point Jon.

Rev. Kelly Todd
Sent from my iPad

On Feb 25, 2012, at 11:11 AM, Jon Kreisler <jonkreisler@gmail.com> wrote:

> AT&T contracts specifically state there is no guaranteed service level,
> however, to deliberately sabotage a customer's ability to use the service
> is another matter entirely.
> Jon
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (11)
1g.

Re: iPhone user successfully sues AT&T over 3G throttling

Posted by: "kelly@nikonkelly.com" kelly@nikonkelly.com   revkellytodd

Sat Feb 25, 2012 6:42 pm (PST)



yes, Anne, I can see your point, but there was nothing in my
contract that said that ATT would deliver a certain speed,
however, it also did not say that my speed would be cut when/if I
hit a particular threshold. Thus, any cut in speed is a breach of
contract. that is in my opinion what caught ATT on this one.
Kelly Todd

----- Original Message -----
From: AnneL
To: apple-iphone@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 2:33 PM
Subject: Re: [apple-iphone] iPhone user successfully sues AT&T
over 3G throttling

> however, to deliberately sabotage a customer's ability to use
the service
> is another matter entirely.

I haven't read the court's full decision, but I would imagine
that it's not
the throttling itself that caused the ruling, but throttling an
"unlimited"
customer at a lower level than people on tiered plans are
allowed to use
unrestricted. I imagine that if AT&T established their "top 5%"
number and
then throttled *all* data users at the same data point, the
court's decision
might have been different. I imagine it's the fact that the
unlimited users
are singled out for throttling at a threshold that caused the
ruling. If
"unlimited" users are throttled more tightly than tiered plan
users, then
that constitutes a limitation since it's not being applied
across the board.

At this point, as I see it, AT&T has four options:

1. Appeal the ruling and fight it out in court, which means
either AT&T
wins and nothing changes, or the customer wins and AT&T is stuck
with the
other choices below

2. Stop throttling unlimited plan users at lower thresholds than
the
highest level tiered plan

3. Pick an arbitrary "top 5%" level and throttle everybody,
regardless of
plan, when they reach that level

4. Cancel the unlimited plans altogether and force customers to
go to a
tiered plan.

Since there's only one outcome in four that ends well for me, as
an
unlimited user, chances are that when all the dust clears I'll
end up
jumping ship to another carrier, likely Verizon, who also
throttles, but
much more reasonably -- they only throttle those using a
particular tower
when THAT tower becomes congested, and they stop throttling as
soon as the
congestion eases, usually a matter of hours or even minutes,
rather than for
the rest of the billing cycle as AT&T does.

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (11)
1h.

Re: iPhone user successfully sues AT&T over 3G throttling

Posted by: "N.A. Nada" whodo678@comcast.net

Sat Feb 25, 2012 8:07 pm (PST)



Nice analysis, and just what I was thinking, except I don't see canceling it as n available option to AT&T. It would be a breach of contract, and that is why they are using subtle coercion.

I am surprised that no one has suggested false advertising. If you throttle back, then the theoretic amount of possible data usage is greatly reduced compared to a non-throttled account. That seems to be the opposite of unlimited, or more correctly... limited.

Brent

On Feb 25, 2012, at 11:33 AM, AnneL wrote:

> > however, to deliberately sabotage a customer's ability to use the service
> > is another matter entirely.
>
> I haven't read the court's full decision, but I would imagine that it's not
> the throttling itself that caused the ruling, but throttling an "unlimited"
> customer at a lower level than people on tiered plans are allowed to use
> unrestricted. I imagine that if AT&T established their "top 5%" number and
> then throttled *all* data users at the same data point, the court's decision
> might have been different. I imagine it's the fact that the unlimited users
> are singled out for throttling at a threshold that caused the ruling. If
> "unlimited" users are throttled more tightly than tiered plan users, then
> that constitutes a limitation since it's not being applied across the board.
>
> At this point, as I see it, AT&T has four options:
>
> 1. Appeal the ruling and fight it out in court, which means either AT&T
> wins and nothing changes, or the customer wins and AT&T is stuck with the
> other choices below
>
> 2. Stop throttling unlimited plan users at lower thresholds than the
> highest level tiered plan
>
> 3. Pick an arbitrary "top 5%" level and throttle everybody, regardless of
> plan, when they reach that level
>
> 4. Cancel the unlimited plans altogether and force customers to go to a
> tiered plan.
>
> Since there's only one outcome in four that ends well for me, as an
> unlimited user, chances are that when all the dust clears I'll end up
> jumping ship to another carrier, likely Verizon, who also throttles, but
> much more reasonably -- they only throttle those using a particular tower
> when THAT tower becomes congested, and they stop throttling as soon as the
> congestion eases, usually a matter of hours or even minutes, rather than for
> the rest of the billing cycle as AT&T does.

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (11)
2a.

Re: Email

Posted by: "Jay Abraham" jaygroups@abrahamgroup.net   kerala01212001

Sat Feb 25, 2012 4:03 am (PST)



Hi Janet

If you are going to use IMAP, you should set it up on all your devices.

To set it up, (if your ISP allows IMAP )
Set up a new account in Settings: Mail.....: set up new account. Once you enter your name, e-mail address and password, it will give you a box where the tabs will be IMAP or PoP. Fill in the requested info. Once your IMAP account is set up, disable your POP account.

Jay

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 24, 2012, at 5:32 PM, "Wayne & Janet Brunner" <wajabrun@nelson-tel.net> wrote:

> Thank you to everyone for your helpful replies about getting email on more than one device. Now, I would like to try the IMAP but don't have a clue where to start. Can someone help an old gramma? I have my POP3 email set up now. How do I change it to IMAP on my iPhone?
> Thanks in Advance!
> Janet
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: apple-iphone@yahoogroups.com [mailto:apple-iphone@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of Jay Abraham
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 12:01 PM
> To: apple-iphone@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [apple-iphone] Email
>
> I actually believe IMAP is better for this. I get a lot of e-mail and it is
> easier for me to handle it once and not have to do it both on an iPad and on
> my Mac. When I travel for business, I may only take my IPad and be gone for
> several days then I would need to look at the Mail again on my Mac if using
> POP.
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (21)
3.

POP to IMAP Transition

Posted by: "Sandy Wright" sandywright11@gmail.com   sandyinwi

Sat Feb 25, 2012 5:09 am (PST)



My Internet provider is Charter which uses POP. It was problematic for me for 2 reasons. One the issue people have been discussing: not having emails sync, and having to manually delete email off the iPhone; and second when I was travelling I couldn't send email from my mail client. I had to log in to Charter's web interface. My solution has been to get this Gmail account. In addition, since I had had the other for years and years, I just set up the POP account preferences to automatically forward (and then delete) all email to the Gmail account. It has worked great for me. I still get email from old friends if they accidentally send email to the old address, but I have all the benefits of the IMAP protocol.
Sandy

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)
4.

iPod Touch

Posted by: "Nick Kanel" giant.toad@yahoo.com   giant.toad

Sat Feb 25, 2012 8:01 am (PST)



I have an iPod Touch 3gen and it is version 4. I went to the App store and when I tried to search something, the app crashed. I did it a few more times and it still did the same thing. I tried to go on another app and the app crashed and froze my iPod mid-shutdown. When I plug it into iTunes as it was frozen, iTunes recognized the device and synced it. I unplugged it for it to run out of battery. After it ran out of battery, I plugged it in again and the iPod froze as it was starting up. iTunes did not recognize the device this time and it didn't show up in my library. What can I do to fix this?

Thanks!

Nick

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)
5a.

game center

Posted by: "Thomash" tomvols@yahoo.com   tomvols

Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:11 am (PST)



Does anyone know if (and how if possible) you can sign in to 2 different game center accounts simultaneously on the same device? I am hooked on war of words 30 games just isn't enough but its a real pain switching back and forth. Thanks in advance, Tom

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (5)
6a.

photo stream

Posted by: "Allan Aunkst" aaunkst@gmail.com   tama.drummer62

Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:11 am (PST)



do photos on the photo stream automatically delete after 30 days?

*Allan Aunkst*

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (14)
6b.

Re: photo stream

Posted by: "Donald" xlnt74@sbcglobal.net   xlnt74@sbcglobal.net

Sat Feb 25, 2012 3:21 pm (PST)



I have photos in my photo stream that are several months old. It may have to do with number of photos not length of time.

--- In apple-iphone@yahoogroups.com, Allan Aunkst <aaunkst@...> wrote:
>
> do photos on the photo stream automatically delete after 30 days?
>
> *Allan Aunkst*
>

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (14)
6c.

Re: photo stream

Posted by: "Jim Saklad" jimdoc@me.com   jimdoc01

Sat Feb 25, 2012 6:41 pm (PST)



> do photos on the photo stream automatically delete after 30 days?
> *Allan Aunkst*

"iCloud manages your Photo Stream efficiently so you don't run out of storage space on your iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch. If you have Photo Stream enabled on your iOS device, every single photo you take appears in a special Photo Stream album that holds your last 1000 photos. You can't edit or delete photos from your Photo Stream. If you want to touch up a photo or keep a favorite shot permanently, simply save it to your Camera Roll. iCloud stores new photos for 30 days, so you have plenty of time to connect your iOS device to Wi-Fi and make sure you always have your most recent shots handy."

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jim Saklad mailto:jimdoc@me.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (14)
6d.

Re: photo stream

Posted by: "Allan" aaunkst@gmail.com   tama.drummer62

Sat Feb 25, 2012 7:06 pm (PST)



The only way I've seen to delete from photo stream is to delete the entire stream, I know of no way to delete single photos from photo stream.

Email sent by iphone 4

On Feb 25, 2012, at 20:48, Jim Saklad <jimdoc@me.com> wrote:

>> do photos on the photo stream automatically delete after 30 days?
>> *Allan Aunkst*
>
> "iCloud manages your Photo Stream efficiently so you don�t run out of storage space on your iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch. If you have Photo Stream enabled on your iOS device, every single photo you take appears in a special Photo Stream album that holds your last 1000 photos. You can�t edit or delete photos from your Photo Stream. If you want to touch up a photo or keep a favorite shot permanently, simply save it to your Camera Roll. iCloud stores new photos for 30 days, so you have plenty of time to connect your iOS device to Wi-Fi and make sure you always have your most recent shots handy."
>

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (14)
7a.

Re: Name Change

Posted by: "flapdoodle44" flapdoodle@gmail.com   flapdoodle44

Sat Feb 25, 2012 10:25 am (PST)



According to the Oxford Dictionary, interweb is meant to be humor.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/Interweb

--- In apple-iphone@yahoogroups.com, lwr32 <whiterabbit32@...> wrote:
>
> Did the "internet" get a name change? I've gotten ligit emails and spam with the "internet" was referred to as the "interweb". Even CD Baby sent me their email using "interweb" instead of "internet". It may sound silly but it's just something that bothers me every time I hear it or read it.
>
> Alice
>

Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (2)
Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Yahoo! Groups

Parenting Zone

Tips for a happy,

healthy home

Yahoo! Groups

Dog Group

Connect and share with

dog owners like you

Yahoo! Groups

Small Business Group

Own a business?

Connect with others.

Need to Reply?

Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.

Create New Topic | Visit Your Group on the Web
Posted by at