Dear Verizon

[clavin]

Simple solution Verizon... For anyone who cannot get any other form of internet access via your company could you at least consider giving the rural people more GB's or a discount?  That would be a great thing!

[jupiter837]

Okay, everyone know who Vodafone is? Check this out,

http://www.lightreading.com/blog.asp?blog_sectionid=414&doc_id=196548

[jupiter837]

And check this out. They start their roll out in  rural areas. http://gadgetsteria.com/2010/12/01/german-carriers-t-mobile-and-vodafone-announce-lte-pricing-lte/

 Is Verizon Lte not as good?

[crimedoggies]

---

clavin wrote:

Simple solution Verizon... For anyone who cannot get any other form of internet access via your company could you at least consider giving the rural people more GB's or a discount?  That would be a great thing!

---

Let me get this right clavin, you CHOOSE to live in a rural area and because you don't have access to other internet options in your area you expect Verizon to either lower their price or increase their GB allowance?   Perhaps part of wide open spaces and clean air is a lack of high speed internet?  Verizon is spending BILLIONS to provide 4G, in what world should they even consider your suggestion.  And before you go touting off asking if I am employed by Verizon the answer is no.  Not everybody that looks at Verizon in a positive light or questions the common sense of some peoples suggestions work for Verzion.

[jupiter837]

Heres a suggestion for Verizon. I have read where they plan to keep their 3g network up for many more years, but at some point they plan to turn it off. Well okay, leave it on. It already covers a large rural area. People will be going over to "4g" with their phones and netbooks if they want too.  Verizon could set their 3g network as rural broadband solution. Why turn it off if they can make some money from it? Take about 90 million cell phones off it and I'm sure it could handle larger caps, and the home users wouldn't hurt their "4g" service at all. 

 But the term "Rural" can mean a few things. I live in a very small town of about 3500 people. We have Verizon 3g service. I consider it a rural area. But 6 miles away is another town that has about 4000 people, and also has Verizon 3g. Surrounding these towns could be a few hunderd to a thousand  more people.  Now we have tower in town, the other city has an evdo antenna mounted on the water tower. So two towers that cover maybe 10000 people, in a rural area.  That seems like a fair deal for Verizon and they must think so too.

Now if someone lives alone on top of a mountain. Well they can get Hughesnet.

[clavin]

Ok, you don't work for them but you're definetly a fanboy.  Hey, I'll give you some positives.  I like Verizon.  I do like the fact that they do offer better coverage then any other company.  Yes, I do choose to live in a rural area.  Wouldn't trade the country for better EVER, EVER, EVER.  If there was one company I would count on for the best internet in the future I'd count on VERIZON.  Just because I want to see them improve by giving more GB's doesn't mean I hate them.  Don't be so defensive for their sake.  Sorry if you feel I'm bashing your best buddy...  In the country hardly anyone is even USING the tower I know that for a fact.   The tower sits on my parents property 2 miles from me.  You can't give me any logical reason that 8-10 GB's wouldn't work fine.  And I'm sure in the future prices will go down.  They have the right to charge whatever, but I can critize them can't I?  I don't think they will "listen in this world" but it makes me feel good  Don't you ever vent?

[steveanderson13]

---

clavin wrote:

Ok, you don't work for them but you're definetly a fanboy.  Hey, I'll give you some positives.  I like Verizon.  I do like the fact that they do offer better coverage then any other company.  Yes, I do choose to live in a rural area.  Wouldn't trade the country for better EVER, EVER, EVER.  If there was one company I would count on for the best internet in the future I'd count on VERIZON.  Just because I want to see them improve by giving more GB's doesn't mean I hate them.  Don't be so defensive for their sake.  Sorry if you feel I'm bashing your best buddy...  In the country hardly anyone is even USING the tower I know that for a fact.   The tower sits on my parents property 2 miles from me.  You can't give me any logical reason that 8-10 GB's wouldn't work fine.  And I'm sure in the future prices will go down.  They have the right to charge whatever, but I can critize them can't I?  I don't think they will "listen in this world" but it makes me feel good  Don't you ever vent?

---

Yeah, venting is good but it's not gonna change anything.  Right now, the cost of wireless internet is not practical  for video for most people.  That's what TV and DVD are for.  The limit works fine for NORMAL use--I bump my cap after using all day every day WITHOUT video and I've found the Palm with free 5 gig hotspot is the best deal. So the change to 4g has nothing to do with that.  As to what good 4g is for, it will make it faster for people with normal use (not video) which may help a lot of people.  Here's a good article that expresses some reality on the subject:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/perlow/when-netflix-iphone-meets-4g-wireless-hell-breaks-loose/15074

[clavin]

All I'm really saying is that 7-10 GB a month for the 50 bucks is a good middle ground.  I say this because Verizon earlier said that the 4g lte would cost them 1/2 to 2/3 the cost of 3g.  Therefore, 4g with upping the allotment to 8+/- GB would keep any moderate user happy.  You could watch a movie once a week, play online gaming plenty of hours and surf enough on 8-10 GB.  5 keeps you watching constantly.  I know, you can fork out the 80 bucks for 10 GB, but I can't imagine any normal family would.  Although 3G did start out at 79.99 then two years later dropped to 59.99... I guess I'll keep my fingers crossed. 

[steveanderson13]

---

clavin wrote:

All I'm really saying is that 7-10 GB a month for the 50 bucks is a good middle ground.  I say this because Verizon earlier said that the 4g lte would cost them 1/2 to 2/3 the cost of 3g.  Therefore, 4g with upping the allotment to 8+/- GB would keep any moderate user happy.  You could watch a movie once a week, play online gaming plenty of hours and surf enough on 8-10 GB.  5 keeps you watching constantly.  I know, you can fork out the 80 bucks for 10 GB, but I can't imagine any normal family would.  Although 3G did start out at 79.99 then two years later dropped to 59.99... I guess I'll keep my fingers crossed. 

---

Hey Clavin, for what you are describing--movie once a week,  gaming, etc., that is not gonna fit even on 7-10.  It looks light right now the plans are INTENDED to prevent high use because high use for some people may mean poor quality for others.  Here's PCMag's take:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2373767,00.asp  

I'm reading many places that although Sprint advertises unlimited, users are throttled after a heavy use (video) and they average 7 gig.

Since your options seem to be limited because of your locale, consider a smartphone like Android--it really does have unlimited use for $30.  I have one.  Good luck--you are probably right that the prices will fall and more options will become available but who knows when?

[jupiter837]

Wildblue the satellite broadband company plans to lunch a new super satellite early in 2011. Service should be viable by the end of the year. They are talking about offer larger caps and faster service.  It might be something to check out later. http://www.viasat.com/broadband-satellite-networks/viasat-1 I'm sure they'll do everything in their power to buck it up, but maybe, just maybe.