overheard in providence

So it looks like new users of everybody’s favorite mobile device (well mine at least) will no longer have access to unlimited data plans on AT&T. It’s no secret that iPhones, and now iPads, have been perpetually crushing AT&T’s 3G network. While I’m sure most of the internet is pissed off at AT&T’s announcement, no one should be surprised (or even particularly pissed off) that AT&T has decided to start charging per MB downloaded (2 plans: $15 for 200 MB/month, $25 for 2000 MB/month).

When the iPhone first came out, it’s super awesome web-browsing meant that, for the first time, mobile users (like normal ones, not just mega nerds) were regularly accessing the web via their phones. A year after the iPhone 3G came out, iPhone users were still gobbling up 5 to 10 times as much internet as other smartphone users. Since then, iPhone-based web consumption has continued to skyrocket. Add to that the fact that Apples new 3G iPad is sold out everywhere (mine ships in two weeks), and the fact that AT&T *finally* plans to support tethering one’s iPhone internet connection to one’s laptop, and you have a whole heap of trouble for AT&T’s already strained network.

Obviously the sensible thing to do in this situation is proclaim that AT&T totally blows (BOOOOOOO! YOU SUCK AT&T!!!), but it really does seem like attempting to offer unlimited data access over wireless is inherently problematic. As better and better web technology is introduced, people are simply going to continue to consume as much internet as you give them. That’s why any speed/capacity improvements AT&T makes to their network are immediately devoured by iPhone and iPad users. For example, suppose I’m killing 10 minutes browsing the internet on my phone. I typically spend a good chunk of that time waiting for pages for load. This means that if pages loaded faster, I’d just use my time to view more pages, and what’s worse, I’d start checking the web more often. Once I get my iPad, the amount of time I’ll be looking to spend browsing the internet will only increase. Plus I’ll want to view videos, because lets face it, nothing lets you know your livin’ large in the 21st century like viewing some hilarious youTube videos on your kick ass iPad.

At this point, I think that AT&T has correctly concluded that the strain on their network isn’t likely to change as cellular speeds improve. Most popular US-oriented webpages are designed to be viewed on high speed WiFi internet connections, but these are exactly the same pages people want to access over cell networks. Unless cellular internet speeds approach WiFi speeds (which isn’t going to happen), they’ll always be an unquenchable demand for cellular bandwidth.

The only real solution, it seems, is to create incentives for people to use WiFi as much as possible. Municipal WiFi could be much more widespread, but this is less likely to happen if AT&T continues to offer unlimited data plans. Also, as David Pogue recently noted, cable companies are rolling out large networks of wifi hotspots (at least around NYC at least). AT&T’s new pricing plan has just made this service a lot more valuable, and as such, it’s likely to grow at a much faster rate. Having unlimited cellular internet is great, but forcing communities to step up their wifi coverage is arguably as important.

If anything, criticism of AT&T should focus on their on whether or not they succeed at making WiFi-based internet access more widespread. For example, AT&T has not pushed for large scale municipal WiFi networks, but they do have a substantial network of Starbucks/McDonalds-based hotspots. Also, two weeks ago, AT&T finally started selling a 3G microcell for $150. If you connect this magical device to your home internet, your cell phone will use it for both calls and data when you’re at home. This has the advantage of providing you with faster internet (and potentially clearly phone calls) since it relies on your home’s (hopefully) fast internet connection. These devices have the potential to save AT&T enormous amounts of bandwidth, since presumably many homes can all be sharing a single microcell. As such, their price should be much, much lower.