P3Droid: Some Food for Thought - Bootloaders, Rooting, Manufacturers, and Carriers

[SquireSCA]

It's all profit.

Isn't that the #1 reason for being in business?

Yes, but that was not my point. Because it is 100% profit, if it doesn't sell well there is no reason to get rid of it. They don't have any real operation costs, as the whole thing is them simply charging you for data, twice.

It's isn't like most products or services, where they have to do a cost/benefit analysis and see whether something is "profitable" enough to justify its continuance..

The "service" is not an actual service that they have to provide, create, develop, etc... The hardware and OS support it. All they are doing is double-dipping with the fees.

The other person's point was that they wouldn't do it if it didn't make money. I am merely pointing out that if 5 people pay it, then it's making money. LOL

 

[hookbill]

lol @ "Things are moving faster than I thought."

Really? I love a good laugh, whats so funny about that?

 

[jkhonea]

It's all profit.

Isn't that the #1 reason for being in business?

God knows I don't do my job just for the fun of it.

 

[TheTyler0013]

@P3Droid: For those worried, just don't tether w/o a plan No matter what build you are on. Things are moving faster than I thought.

P3Droid Last night was stressful, but today is a new day. Knowing the focus of it all helps though. - So in summurization - don't tether w/o a plan

I'm simply telling you what he's saying. You make your own judgements

if he remained like that last night and throughout this entire thing i think the thread would have been a lot calmer.

But from last night..... i have no reason to believe him (he could be or couldn't be right, i will eat crow if i have to) I tend to stay away from the crazies.

and not tether without a plan should be common sense.... but there are those ppl :icon_eek:

we will see in time.

 

[SquireSCA]

It's all profit.

Isn't that the #1 reason for being in business?

God knows I don't do my job just for the fun of it.

See my last post. It wasn't about whether they should turn a profit. It was that tethering plans are ALL profit, there is no overhead as all they are doing is charging you twice for the same data on your phone.

That is why there is no incentive to get rid of the plans, no matter how little they sell. It's free money for them every time a person signs up.

 

[Skull One]

The very fact they haven't done any of those means people are paying.

Not true in all cases. If we were talking about a tangible product or service, you would be correct. If it was a car, or a toaster oven that people were not buying, you would scrap the product because it doesn't make sense to have workers, engineers, marketing people, tools and machinary sitting there building a product that doesn't sell. That is costing you money.

Tethering services, do not cost them anything. It's like printing money. There is no real investment. The phones and the OS come with it built in, using the same data channels and towers that are already there set up for it.

VZW and other carriers simply took that feature out of the phone so that they could charge for it. It costs them nothing if not even a single person every subscribes to it. There is no overhead to cover, no capital investment to recoup.

For every person that does sign up though, it's just like printing money. It's all profit. They don't have to do anything except bill you for it. You were downloading data from the phone with the normal data plan, and your phone is still downloading data from the same network, at the same speed, etc... The only difference is that they get to charge you a second time for data. ;-)

Tethering is a tangible product. It is either on and works or off and doesn't.

Yes VZW took something and split it to make more money. Their right as a on going business concern. And as long as the sheeple keep paying for the tethering service, they have no incentive to change the current arrangement.

Personally, anyone that blames VZW for this pricing structure is either ignorant or stupid. They need to blame the sheeple that are buying it without a second thought to the implications.

 

[SquireSCA]

The very fact they haven't done any of those means people are paying.

Not true in all cases. If we were talking about a tangible product or service, you would be correct. If it was a car, or a toaster oven that people were not buying, you would scrap the product because it doesn't make sense to have workers, engineers, marketing people, tools and machinary sitting there building a product that doesn't sell. That is costing you money.

Tethering services, do not cost them anything. It's like printing money. There is no real investment. The phones and the OS come with it built in, using the same data channels and towers that are already there set up for it.

VZW and other carriers simply took that feature out of the phone so that they could charge for it. It costs them nothing if not even a single person every subscribes to it. There is no overhead to cover, no capital investment to recoup.

For every person that does sign up though, it's just like printing money. It's all profit. They don't have to do anything except bill you for it. You were downloading data from the phone with the normal data plan, and your phone is still downloading data from the same network, at the same speed, etc... The only difference is that they get to charge you a second time for data. ;-)

Tethering is a tangible product. It is either on and works or off and doesn't.

Yes VZW took something and split it to make more money. Their right as a on going business concern. And as long as the sheeple keep paying for the tethering service, they have no incentive to change the current arrangement.

Personally, anyone that blames VZW for this pricing structure is either ignorant or stupid. They need to blame the sheeple that are buying it without a second thought to the implications.

You are still missing the point. I cannot explain it any simpler for you other than to say that it is like the water company analogy.

You pay for water, but then they tell you that you cannot shower with that water that you already paid for. If you want to bathe, then you need to pay another fee, for the same water.

How many times should we pay for the same amount of water?

I am not a sheeple for asking the questions. The sheeple are the ones that never question anything and just blindly follow whatever the Mother Ship hands them...

 

[SquireSCA]

Oh, I retract my comment on the sheeple response. I misread how you used that. Yes, the people that just pay for the same data twice are who it applies to, and so long as they keep doing it, VZW has no reason to change.

We agree on that.

 

[hookbill]

It's all profit.

Isn't that the #1 reason for being in business?

Yes, but that was not my point. Because it is 100% profit, if it doesn't sell well there is no reason to get rid of it. They don't have any real operation costs, as the whole thing is them simply charging you for data, twice.

It's isn't like most products or services, where they have to do a cost/benefit analysis and see whether something is "profitable" enough to justify its continuance..

The "service" is not an actual service that they have to provide, create, develop, etc... The hardware and OS support it. All they are doing is double-dipping with the fees.

The other person's point was that they wouldn't do it if it didn't make money. I am merely pointing out that if 5 people pay it, then it's making money. LOL

Wait a second. They provide the data, correct? So since they provide the data, that means they provide the service. If they choose to break this service off into another form of service, then they have every right to and to charge you for it.

What you're saying is something like this: Cable television provides me digitial cable. So since I'm a digital cable customer I should be entitled to all the digital service they are offering. So it's OK for me to hack into their sports area or pay per view. After all it's available on the cable line anyway. And more then 5 people are paying for it so it's OK.

It's a product, just like anything else and with that product they can choose how to charge for it.

 

[Skull One]

You are still missing the point. I cannot explain it any simpler for you other than to say that it is like the water company analogy.

You pay for water, but then they tell you that you cannot shower with that water that you already paid for. If you want to bathe, then you need to pay another fee, for the same water.

How many times should we pay for the same amount of water?

I am not a sheeple for asking the questions. The sheeple are the ones that never question anything and just blindly follow whatever the Mother Ship hands them...

I love it when people say "you are missing the point". It shows a level of ignorance that I can only laugh or cry at it.

Fact: Tethering is a product sold by VZW.

Fact: It is a profit product for VZW.

Fact: Sheeple are paying for this product.

Those facts can't be argued with. I really don't give a flying-flip how you want to spin this. I am pointing out FACTS and only FACTS.

Your opinion that they shouldn't be allowed to double deep is irrelevant to those facts. Your opinion of how things should be done is also irrelevant to those facts. The sooner you figure this out this better off you will be as a consumer.

Pay for tethering and you are telling VZW life is golden. If you don't you better make sure the other people that are paying stop as well or your spin/opinion doesn't mean JACK.

 

[SquireSCA]

Isn't that the #1 reason for being in business?

Yes, but that was not my point. Because it is 100% profit, if it doesn't sell well there is no reason to get rid of it. They don't have any real operation costs, as the whole thing is them simply charging you for data, twice.

It's isn't like most products or services, where they have to do a cost/benefit analysis and see whether something is "profitable" enough to justify its continuance..

The "service" is not an actual service that they have to provide, create, develop, etc... The hardware and OS support it. All they are doing is double-dipping with the fees.

The other person's point was that they wouldn't do it if it didn't make money. I am merely pointing out that if 5 people pay it, then it's making money. LOL

Wait a second. They provide the data, correct? So since they provide the data, that means they provide the service. If they choose to break this service off into another form of service, then they have every right to and to charge you for it.

What you're saying is something like this: Cable television provides me digitial cable. So since I'm a digital cable customer I should be entitled to all the digital service they are offering. So it's OK for me to hack into their sports area or pay per view. After all it's available on the cable line anyway. And more then 5 people are paying for it so it's OK.

It's a product, just like anything else and with that product they can choose how to charge for it.

It's not a product. I am not getting additional data, or accessing sites or channels that I cannot access with my phone. If I copy the PPT file to my SD card and email it from there, how is it different than if I tether my laptop and send the file from that via a tether?

I am accessing the same site, sending the same identical packets of data, through the same phone, over the same data channel, through the same tower and network.

All that changed is that VZW sees an opportunity to charge me extra. Why? I have not used more data, or done anything to incur any cost on their part.

They just *want* more money from me, that's all. It's a free country, they are feel to do so, but just because businesses are allowed to do it doesn't make it moral or ethical.

When I say that it is not tangible, I mean that in a sense that they did not have to incur any costs or overhead to create it. It is not like building a car... you have millions in engineering and R&D, testing and DOT certification, labor costs, a plant, tooling up the machines and production lines, marketing, distribution, etc... the list goes on. These are all costs that a business incurs in order to get a product to market.

What exactly did VZW do to create the tethering service?

VZW Execs: "You know, Google has this feature built in, that if we disable and sell it as an additional service, it is pure profit. The beauty of it is that we don't have to invest a dime, we just charge the customers twice for the data that they already have! How can we go wrong?"

And there is much nodding and salivating. LOL

That's what I meant.

 

[freezyfreaky]

You are still missing the point. I cannot explain it any simpler for you other than to say that it is like the water company analogy.

You pay for water, but then they tell you that you cannot shower with that water that you already paid for. If you want to bathe, then you need to pay another fee, for the same water.

How many times should we pay for the same amount of water?

I am not a sheeple for asking the questions. The sheeple are the ones that never question anything and just blindly follow whatever the Mother Ship hands them...

I love it when people say "you are missing the point". It shows a level of ignorance that I can only laugh or cry at it.

Fact: Tethering is a product sold by VZW.

Fact: It is a profit product for VZW.

Fact: Sheeple are paying for this product.

Those facts can't be argued with. I really don't give a flying-flip how you want to spin this. I am pointing out FACTS and only FACTS.

Your opinion that they shouldn't be allowed to double deep is irrelevant to those facts. Your opinion of how things should be done is also irrelevant to those facts. The sooner you figure this out this better off you will be as a consumer.

Pay for tethering and you are telling VZW life is golden. If you don't you better make sure the other people that are paying stop as well or your spin/opinion doesn't mean JACK.

+1

People need to stop looking at the definition of unlimited data in the dictionary and instead look it up in their Terms of Service contract. That's what matters in the real world.

 

[SquireSCA]

You are still missing the point. I cannot explain it any simpler for you other than to say that it is like the water company analogy.

You pay for water, but then they tell you that you cannot shower with that water that you already paid for. If you want to bathe, then you need to pay another fee, for the same water.

How many times should we pay for the same amount of water?

I am not a sheeple for asking the questions. The sheeple are the ones that never question anything and just blindly follow whatever the Mother Ship hands them...

I love it when people say "you are missing the point". It shows a level of ignorance that I can only laugh or cry at it.

Fact: Tethering is a product sold by VZW.

Fact: It is a profit product for VZW.

Fact: Sheeple are paying for this product.

Those facts can't be argued with. I really don't give a flying-flip how you want to spin this. I am pointing out FACTS and only FACTS.

Your opinion that they shouldn't be allowed to double deep is irrelevant to those facts. Your opinion of how things should be done is also irrelevant to those facts. The sooner you figure this out this better off you will be as a consumer.

Pay for tethering and you are telling VZW life is golden. If you don't you better make sure the other people that are paying stop as well or your spin/opinion doesn't mean JACK.

+1

People need to stop looking at the definition of unlimited data in the dictionary and instead look it up in their Terms of Service contract. That's what matters in the real world.

And it is a sad world when we have to change the definition of a word like "unlimited" to mean "very restrictive and limited"...

The fact that we let corporations mislead and do things like this, is the problem.

They call it unlimited, because people will assume just that. Words mean things, and just because they pay a bunch of scumbag lawyers to cleverly redefine universally accepted terminology into something contrary and self-serving and misleading doesn't make it "right"...

It's the "world we live in" because too many people are willing to just accept whatever dog poo they are handed by those in power.

Well, the Enron and others like them are "just how the world is today", so I guess we shouldn't expect them to be held accountable...

 

[hookbill]

Yes, but that was not my point. Because it is 100% profit, if it doesn't sell well there is no reason to get rid of it. They don't have any real operation costs, as the whole thing is them simply charging you for data, twice.

It's isn't like most products or services, where they have to do a cost/benefit analysis and see whether something is "profitable" enough to justify its continuance..

The "service" is not an actual service that they have to provide, create, develop, etc... The hardware and OS support it. All they are doing is double-dipping with the fees.

The other person's point was that they wouldn't do it if it didn't make money. I am merely pointing out that if 5 people pay it, then it's making money. LOL

Wait a second. They provide the data, correct? So since they provide the data, that means they provide the service. If they choose to break this service off into another form of service, then they have every right to and to charge you for it.

What you're saying is something like this: Cable television provides me digitial cable. So since I'm a digital cable customer I should be entitled to all the digital service they are offering. So it's OK for me to hack into their sports area or pay per view. After all it's available on the cable line anyway. And more then 5 people are paying for it so it's OK.

It's a product, just like anything else and with that product they can choose how to charge for it.

It's not a product. I am not getting additional data, or accessing sites or channels that I cannot access with my phone. If I copy the PPT file to my SD card and email it from there, how is it different than if I tether my laptop and send the file from that via a tether?

I am accessing the same site, sending the same identical packets of data, through the same phone, over the same data channel, through the same tower and network.

All that changed is that VZW sees an opportunity to charge me extra. Why? I have not used more data, or done anything to incur any cost on their part.

They just *want* more money from me, that's all. It's a free country, they are feel to do so, but just because businesses are allowed to do it doesn't make it moral or ethical.

When I say that it is not tangible, I mean that in a sense that they did not have to incur any costs or overhead to create it. It is not like building a car... you have millions in engineering and R&D, testing and DOT certification, labor costs, a plant, tooling up the machines and production lines, marketing, distribution, etc... the list goes on. These are all costs that a business incurs in order to get a product to market.

What exactly did VZW do to create the tethering service?

VZW Execs: "You know, Google has this feature built in, that if we disable and sell it as an additional service, it is pure profit. The beauty of it is that we don't have to invest a dime, we just charge the customers twice for the data that they already have! How can we go wrong?"

And there is much nodding and salivating. LOL

That's what I meant.

That may very well have been said. And it's absolutely right.

OK man. I give up on you, have a good day.

 

[SquireSCA]

That may very well have been said. And it's absolutely right.

OK man. I give up on you, have a good day.

Do you really not look at the context that I was replying in, to his assertion that "if people were not signing up for it, they would just pull the product"?

Or are you going to continue to take it out of context and debate a point I didn't make?

Last time. I said that unlike most products and services that have overhead and lots of costs incurred to get them to market, this one doesn't. It costs them nothing to just leave it out there whether it sells or not, because unlike a car or a widget, it didn't cost them anything to produce. It's a billing tactic, nothing more. So they don't have to be concerned with "is it selling enough to justify the cost of keeping the product line running"...

There is no product line. It's an artificial service, its conceptual and has no real associated costs to recoup or cover.

Why doesn't that make sense, in the clear context that I was applying it to? LOL