It's weird, too, that they didn't price LTE more attractively. Lower rates to get people started and easy-to-understand pricing as usage ramps up. I'm tempted to think that from the way things are priced and marketed that the carriers don't want LTE to take off too quickly, so they're really sticking it to the early adopters.
If we start seeing more stories like the one in the Wall Street Journal this morning, I suspect it will be difficult to get people excited about LTE.
The reporter talked to several people who had already used up all or a large part of their monthly data allotment since Friday when the LTE iPads went on sale.
The hitch is that LTE data essentially isn't any cheaper than 3G data-- it just takes less time to use it up.
Perhaps early adopters are power users and more average users will see their data plans last longer. But I think people will be wary until there is some evidence of that.
So the operators are the ones that are sticking it to consumers -- as opposed to the company that is selling a device that operates at the equvalent of 1.6 miles per gallon.
I'm guessing that the device testing and approval process for mobile networks is about as rigorous as the old concussion test in football: How many fingers am I holding up? Three? Close enough.
Ha! There's probably some truth to that. The iPhone 4's new design and antenna placement was obviously shrugged off or rubber stamped by AT&T. Again, the carrier that has the most money and the most customers cares the most about one and the least about the other.
I personally am very leary of jumping into LTE because of bandwidth caps. Even though I'm a Sprint customer, which has unlimited data on smart phones, I think I'm correct in saying Sprint doesn't have unlimited data for other devices. So what does LTE on a tablet get me? Not much at this point, I'm thinking.
The device makers bear some responsibility, too. But the network operators have the most control over pricing for services and they're supposed to be testing and approving devices before allowing them to ride the network.
That's right. Sprint doesn't offer unlimited on tablets. When I spoke to them at CTIA in the fall I got the impression they were actually worried about the ability of an LTE tablet to chew through megabits of data, even as they were looking for 10-Mbit/s out of LTE-Advanced to support 4G tablets. That's some catch, that Catch 22!
I think I am missing something here that does not make any sense to me. Now, if Verizon will only release LTE capable smart phone for the rest of the year, the user will get LTE capable phone when they renew their contract. So, whether the user INTEND to get LTE capable phone or not is irrelevant. It will be there. It might be the same for AT&T and Sprint to a certain degree..
It's weird, too, that they didn't price LTE more attractively. Lower rates to get people started and easy-to-understand pricing as usage ramps up. I'm tempted to think that from the way things are priced and marketed that the carriers don't want LTE to take off too quickly, so they're really sticking it to the early adopters.