VZW force pushing Firmware Update

[rot#AC]

I'm with you. The update wasn't about fixing anything. It was only to remove a promotional feature. I'm sure they will get it on my phone within the next few days and when the time comes, I will then return to being a contract abiding member of the Verizon Legion, paying for MHS and waiting for gingerbread. Then I will actually rape their bandwidth with Netflix.

you have no clue wtf your talking about it fixed the boot problems. and cant wait tell you see your next bill and are getting charged

 

[yodatom10]

you have no clue wtf your talking about it fixed the boot problems. and cant wait tell you see your next bill and are getting charged

Be carefull in the choice of words u use. I did call up Verizon and ask them about this and the said they cant charge u as long as u dont have the new update

 

[weave majjik]

Be carefull in the choice of words u use. I did call up Verizon and ask them about this and the said they cant charge u as long as u dont have the new update

If they cant charge then it cant be theft of service. I dont know if I have ever anticipated my cell phone bill before, but this months has the special aura of "I knew I was right" inside the envelope with the statement.

 

[Mortiel]

Be carefull in the choice of words u use. I did call up Verizon and ask them about this and the said they cant charge u as long as u dont have the new update

I spoke to one of the departments that implements billing and promotions about a week ago regarding how the MHS/MBBC usage works after the promo ends, and they told me directly that the update will remove the free feature, and then at an undisclosed amount of time later, they will start randomly auditing accounts where the phone does not show the updated software version to check for MHS/MBBC usage. Out of pure courtesy, they will likely send some kind of cease and desist notice, but to be honest they are not require to do any such thing... especially when an audit shows the software push was rejected, interrupted, or in other ways manipulated. Believe it or not, they did plan for the contingency of people refusing the update.

Your standard Care/Tech rep will not know this until the first billing adjustment is issued and the customer calls in furious, sadly.

 

[kwd_13]

Funny... I updated my TB (which fixed all my issues) now 193.46 hours up time as compared to pre-update of all about 5 hours uptime being the record....

i just turned on my MHS and got no notice of being charged or no statement of MHS costing $30 a month as being mentioned by other users....


looks to me like I still have MHS free since i never added the $30 charge (and yes i did look to make sure)

I am sure they will catch on eventually but as for now, I am updated to the newest FW and still have free MHS.

 

[weave majjik]

Be carefull in the choice of words u use. I did call up Verizon and ask them about this and the said they cant charge u as long as u dont have the new update

I spoke to one of the departments that implements billing and promotions about a week ago regarding how the MHS/MBBC usage works after the promo ends, and they told me directly that the update will remove the free feature, and then at an undisclosed amount of time later, they will start randomly auditing accounts where the phone does not show the updated software version to check for MHS/MBBC usage. Out of pure courtesy, they will likely send some kind of cease and desist notice, but to be honest they are not require to do any such thing... especially when an audit shows the software push was rejected, interrupted, or in other ways manipulated. Believe it or not, they did plan for the contingency of people refusing the update.

Your standard Care/Tech rep will not know this until the first billing adjustment is issued and the customer calls in furious, sadly.

However, a cease and desist would be the notification necessary to alter my behavior. Then i would have received notification of an intention to charge for said service. Lets assume for the sake of argument that I dont follow tech news. I just own a phone with a free hotspot feature. They didnt have pricing details on the service until roughly ten days ago. Perhaps I considered the update of little importance. Perhaps they pushed the update when my battery was dying. Regardless of circumstance, verizon has never informed me what the charge would be for this service or that this service was even available on my phone. I know because I read about these things. Many people are truly in the dark and they wouldnt charge until they made it clear of their intention to do so. There is no sense in attempting to make me feel morally devoid, as my actions harm no one and actually benefit me very little ($9 savings). I appreciate your insider knowledge on the subject.

 

[sniffs]

Personally, I have no objection to paying for the services that I use.

10 years ago the cable companies tried to do this same thing.. imaging having a router for each computer in your house? it was "illegal" and against their "tos" to connect more than 1 computer up to their internet connection.

now, 10 years later we're letting the wireless companies get away with THE VERY EXACT SAME THING.

Did you pay for each computer in your house that accessed your internet? Nope...and we shouldn't be forced to do it with cellular.

 

[ambushbug73]

10 years ago the cable companies tried to do this same thing.. imaging having a router for each computer in your house? it was "illegal" and against their "tos" to connect more than 1 computer up to their internet connection.

now, 10 years later we're letting the wireless companies get away with THE VERY EXACT SAME THING.

Did you pay for each computer in your house that accessed your internet? Nope...and we shouldn't be forced to do it with cellular.

Nobody is "forcing" you to do anything, you are making a choice. And the bottom line with these situations is always the same, if you don't like what they are doing you have the option of moving to another company or starting your own. If neither of those are a better option then what's the complaint about?

 

[sniffs]

Nobody is "forcing" you to do anything, you are making a choice. And the bottom line with these situations is always the same, if you don't like what they are doing you have the option of moving to another company or starting your own. If neither of those are a better option then what's the complaint about?

If you want to share your data with more than 1 device, you are forced to pay more. What does it matter how you use your 5GB of data? True, a computer can pull the data faster, but there's no diff if you pay for the $20 tethering/hotspot or not.. except for you're paying more to use your data.

Again, the ISP's tried to do this 10 years ago with their cable service and people revolted. Problem with cable companies is that it's zoned.. you couldn't choose an alternate provider.

It shouldn't matter how you use your 5GB of data or how fast you pull it down. If you watch a Netflix movie on a 4G connection, you're using a few hundred MB of data for each movie! It makes no sense except for it's not regulated yet so carriers can get away with it.

And don't throw the "it's in the contract you signed.." because the same verbage was in the cable contracts we all signed 10 years ago, but still connected the wifi router's to the cable box allowing more than 1 computer to connect.

 

[weave majjik]

10 years ago the cable companies tried to do this same thing.. imaging having a router for each computer in your house? it was "illegal" and against their "tos" to connect more than 1 computer up to their internet connection.

now, 10 years later we're letting the wireless companies get away with THE VERY EXACT SAME THING.

Did you pay for each computer in your house that accessed your internet? Nope...and we shouldn't be forced to do it with cellular.

Not only allowing, but staunchly defending the policy. And crazy as I agree it is, Im still willing to pay (eventually) strictly for the convenience it provides.

 

[Mortiel]

Not only allowing, but staunchly defending the policy. And crazy as I agree it is, Im still willing to pay (eventually) strictly for the convenience it provides.

One word out of there sums it up. What most people fail to realize (not speaking to you weave majjik, but to the person you replied to) is that what you are paying for is services to be provided to your mobile device for the sake of convenience.

Do you really need to watch Netflix on your phone? Absolutely not, but it is definitely something to which I have become accustomed.

For the sake of pure survival, do you really need 4G internet streamed to your laptop every where you go? No, but I can say that for me it is an almost necessary convenience for my work.

The point is that paying for MHS is not paying to share data, as one fee allows for sharing to 8-10 devices (Thunderbolt/Revolution vs. Charge respectively). Comparing it to cable companies charging per computer would mean you pay $30 a month per EACH DEVICE you tether to your phone.

You are paying a subsidized fee for mobile internet, which otherwise would run you upwards of $50 plus the cost of a USB modem/dedicated hotspot on Verizon, PLUS you are getting unlimited what would normally be capped. What do you really have to complain about?

Nothing in life is without its own cost, monetary or otherwise, especially luxury. So what you are really saying that you should be provided high luxury for free?

 

[ambushbug73]

If you want to share your data with more than 1 device, you are forced to pay more.

Again, the ISP's tried to do this 10 years ago with their cable service and people revolted. Problem with cable companies is that it's zoned.. you couldn't choose an alternate provider.

.

If you CHOOSE to share your data with more than 1 device you are given that option for a price. When you have a choice to do or not do something, there isn't any forcing going on. Damn, I sound like Yoda.

As far as the cable issue a decade ago, the market took care of the problem then and it will do the same now. If enough people feel strongly enough about it to take their business elsewhere Verizon will be forced to re-evaluate their policy, if not then it will remain how it is.

 

[Mortiel]

However, a cease and desist would be the notification necessary to alter my behavior. Then i would have received notification of an intention to charge for said service. Lets assume for the sake of argument that I dont follow tech news. I just own a phone with a free hotspot feature. They didnt have pricing details on the service until roughly ten days ago. Perhaps I considered the update of little importance. Perhaps they pushed the update when my battery was dying. Regardless of circumstance, verizon has never informed me what the charge would be for this service or that this service was even available on my phone. I know because I read about these things. Many people are truly in the dark and they wouldnt charge until they made it clear of their intention to do so. There is no sense in attempting to make me feel morally devoid, as my actions harm no one and actually benefit me very little ($9 savings). I appreciate your insider knowledge on the subject.

One failed update is not what I am meaning. Multiple failed updates is what merits scrutiny for audits. If they see that an update was user rejected multiple times, and the update failed multiple times due to power loss, it looks suspicious.

To be honest, I could care less what any person does with their property. Why do you think I pay no mind to anyone whom roots their phone entirely to get free tethering? Its not about the action, it was that you made several comments early on that you intended to keep up the behavior as long as possible, and deny all knowledge of culpability. It was that that made me say anything whatsoever. Its just personal integrity.

If I see a dollar sitting in a public place with no one else around, I would likely take it.

If someone (even a stranger) tells me they left a dollar in said public place and not to take, and I see it, I will leave it alone.

 

[sniffs]

Again, can anyone answer "what does it matter how I use my 5GB?"

I'm being provided 5GB, regardless if it's phone data or laptop data, what does it matter how it's used? (aside from downloading illegal stuff)

 

[ambushbug73]

Again, can anyone answer "what does it matter how I use my 5GB?"

I'm being provided 5GB, regardless if it's phone data or laptop data, what does it matter how it's used? (aside from downloading illegal stuff)

From a business standpoint it matters because they are losing a revenue source, simple as that.

 

[Mortiel]

Again, can anyone answer "what does it matter how I use my 5GB?"

I'm being provided 5GB, regardless if it's phone data or laptop data, what does it matter how it's used? (aside from downloading illegal stuff)

Because not only is it a revenue source, but Verizon is try to avoid what AT&T ran into with network over-crowding due to everyone using crazy amounts of data... Would you rather pay extra for what will likely be a fast and reliable service, or an unreliable service that's unlimited? If the latter, you have the wrong service provider.

 

[weave majjik]

Because not only is it a revenue source, but Verizon is try to avoid what AT&T ran into with network over-crowding due to everyone using crazy amounts of data... Would you rather pay extra for what will likely be a fast and reliable service, or an unreliable service that's unlimited? If the latter, you have the wrong service provider.

Your explanation doesnt address his question. He does not have unlimited data, he has a 5 gig plan. I understand the add on for unlimited plans, makes perfect sense to me. On the flip side I think as a tiered plan subscriber the price justification argument you present becomes invalid. True?

 

[ambushbug73]

Your explanation doesnt address his question. He does not have unlimited data, he has a 5 gig plan. I understand the add on for unlimited plans, makes perfect sense to me. On the flip side I think as a tiered plan subscriber the price justification argument you present becomes invalid. True?

It depends, from their business stand point they want him to buy a data plan for his phone and for whatever device he is sharing his data plan with, such as a tablet. The only way they don't make more money is if he uses the 75 MB plan for one or both. If he uses the 2GB plan for both devices then they make $60 a month instead of the $50 a month they make off of his 5GB plan.

Truthfully there are too many variables to just play guessing games, bottom line is no matter how you plan it Verizon isn't going to lose anything in the deal, and they could possible gain more profit.

 

[Mortiel]

Your explanation doesnt address his question. He does not have unlimited data, he has a 5 gig plan. I understand the add on for unlimited plans, makes perfect sense to me. On the flip side I think as a tiered plan subscriber the price justification argument you present becomes invalid. True?

If you have the tiered plan, the agreement presented against Verizon does become invalid, as the $50 MHS plan (4GB) does not make you choose what you do with your data. It literally uses the same data for both tethering and phone data.

Fact is that what Verizon looks at is ways to separate casual users from power users. While I do not like the move away from unlimited data personally, I know why they did it. The more people use data, the more cost has to be spent into maintenance, not to mention everything becomes less reliable. That's a big deal for Verizon.

The only thing that really irked me was the lack of a light-grade data plan (less than $30) for light users. That was just financial choice for Verizon to make more profit.

 

[weave majjik]

A note to return to the original post, the update appears to have taken place on my phone while I was at the gym this evening. I have yet to reboot the phone, but any power down will likely enable their firmware to put its death grip onto my beloved dollar a day savings...I change my battery usually at least once a day, so tomorrow is the big day, and also convienently the last day of my billing cycle.