Charging more for iPhone data plans?

By now many iPhone users have probably read about AT&T complaining that iPhone customers are using an inordinately large amount of bandwidth on its 3G network and that the company may be considering different pricing and/or usage limits. AT&T apparently pointed out that a small portion of iPhone users, like 3% or so, generate about 40% of all the data traffic, and so "penalizing" those heavy users would only be fair, or would it?

 

Obviously, most who read about AT&T's alleged plans probably had a very negative reaction. After all, the current costs for the privilege of having an iPhone are already far higher than we ever imagined paying for a cellphone (my bill for two iPhones is about $180 per month). And it's not like the increasing use should be such a giant surprise to AT&T. I mean, take one look at the iPhone's capability and you know what it can do. So feigning surprise at the data usage and blaming users for overloading its network is a really, really lame approach.

 

It is not a new one, though. I remember surcharges for 2400-baud modem service. And back when I was running a large corporate IT shop, every time we upgraded our hardware, software vendors came knocking on our door trying to jack up the charge for using their software because "it now ran faster." Well, duh..., yes, but faster hardware doesn't entitle software vendors to a windfall. I mean, DSL and cable are a lot faster than dial-up, and they cost hardly more. Technology moves on, things get more powerful and faster all the time, and there's new hardware to take advantage of the faster pipes and services. But companies are trying anyway. When Blu-Ray came out, Netflix added a surcharge for Blu-Ray, claiming that Blu-Ray discs cost more. On principle, I declined to pay extra, shooting myself in the foot for now, but not willing to contribute to setting a precedent that mere technological advance warrants windfall charges.

 

Is there a case to be made for capping data traffic? Probably, at least to some extent. If there are ways to hog an inordinate amount of data bandwidth capacity, then there's a problem. But to then allow companies to impose limits and sell rations at higher prices is a very dangerous precedent, especially when you're dealing with a monopoly like AT&T is with the iPhone. The bigger picture is that we're headed for an era of unprecedented digital media downloads, and any imposed metering would have to be fair for all involved and not simply serve as an excuse for inadequate capacity and lack of planning. So threatening to "penalize" iPhone users simply for using the technology AT&T sold them, and locked them in on, is a remarkably arrogant attempt at addressing the issue.