You could have used the italicised paragraph and made the article longer and more interesting, man.

Fucking sprint cocksuckers own my soul already.

This shouldn't be that surprising. I honestly believe they would have continued with the policy of no unlimited-calling plans if it weren't for the coming switchover in frequencies. Nobody wants to be the odd man out (or even second place) once the old TV frequencies are up for grabs.

Now, if anybody more knowledgeable could talk more about the ins and outs of TV frequencies being switched over, I'd love to hear it, because the industries involved have been unsurprisingly less than forthcoming.

Except that I couldn't find any sources to back up that claim. Hence the italicized paragraph.

Thanks, though.

I work in Sales for a business telecom provider, and this is a complete game-changer.

As far as the television frequencies, you will likely see that cannibalized into several industries. As far as your telecommunications are concerned, expect these 'data' plans to become a bigger feature. Part of the reason wireless data access hasn't completely exploded in the US is the sometimes poor and sluggish coverage areas. Data is being piggybacked into the same frequencies as voice. When things come up for grabs, the industry standard could be to relegate some of the new frequencies as data only. Then you'll see a transition as the current data services and coverage expand to the new frequencies. That will take time, as the coverage areas will have to be built up.

But wait! Things keep changing from there. Voice over IP is the up-and-coming standard for delivery of voice services. So you could reach a point where your home internet is provided wirelessly (as opposed to cable or telephone), and then you can piggy back a VoIP phone into that service. Proceeding further, IPTV is a reality. So even though those frequencies aren't going to be "television" frequencies you could reach a point where voice, data, and television are all being delivered via wireless signal through internet protocol.

Now this is just my best speculation as someone who works in *sales* in the industry (as in, I'm not an engineer, so there's room for error). But yes, essentially you are opening the door for wireless coverage to reach 100% saturation in the US. And you are opening the door for wireless service providers to compete in all data-related services. So AT&T land service could really become quite a relic.

This is great for the telecom companies and great for competition too. It is infinitely less expensive to build and maintain wireless towers than it is to deliver services via cable. I know, you're thinking "Hey asshole, my AT&T home phone is teh way cheaperz than my cel phone." But that's only because it is the incumbent technology. Digging a trench, laying cable, connecting that wire to a physical location, maintaining cable that might be damaged = EXPENSIVE. Building a tower, letting it cover a wide area in radiated frequences = Less Expensive.

Furthermore, new companies can build a smaller network and compete in local markets for all these services. So whereas AT&T owns most of the land cabling in the US, somebody like MetroPCS can target a single market at a time, build a wireless network, and deliver everything. Then AT&T has to drop their price to compete. Consumers win.

I am done rambling. Any questions?

Metro PCS. With all taxes and fees, $65 a month. Unlimited text, voice, internet, video, picture, long distance, everything. No contracts, no activation, no credit check. The phones do cost more ~$100-$250, but no activation and first month free. /End sales pitch.

I am NOT affiliated with them in any way, I just really like their product. Hopefully they will continue to expand into new markets.

I had the same from Verizon, same price then too.

Oh snap, the war might have already started.

You could just do what Qwest does here in Phoenix: neglect to maintain your OSP altogether! Hey, why order a new pedistal cover when you can use a Hefty bag and some electrical tape?

I was really hoping this was about how SG will now not run like shit on mobile devices.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH!

The lack of an unlimited calling plan has been one of my major reasons for not wanting to go cellular with my phone service. Now it's just the horrific price of the unlimited calling plan.

Seriously, my VOIP is $30 a month. I don't think portability is worth over triple the price (at the low end). Maybe I'm in the minority on this. Actually, I'm probably in the minority on this. But still. Yeesh.

I've had an unlimited calling plan for years for 69.99/mo. Have they seriously not been available in the rest of the country?

My landline is something like $45 dollars a month, which I find ridiculous. I find pretty much any phone service to be pretty damn expensive, landline, cell phone, or VOIP. But Perhaps this is because I rarely use the phone, yet it's still essential for a few things.

I know my grandparents used a limited-time landline service for a while, as a second line for my grandmother's dial-up internet. I believe that was significantly cheaper and might fit your needs...if you're getting your internet via cable or no-phone-service DSL.