It’s Official: Voice is Worthless | Hacker News Reader

It’s Official: Voice is Worthless

gigaom.com

44 pointsmjfern24 comments

Important detail: it's about "voice", not "[Google] Voice", though that's how it looks in the title. To me, at least.

Basically, data plans are netting the cell companies more and more money, while voice plans are netting less and less, with the inevitable crossing-point somewhere in the near future (they're saying 2013, by just following the trendlines).

Huh? Any capitalization of 'voice' in a headline reads 'Google Voice' to you?

I read it like Groxx- because voice plan aren't worthless and still make big $ for the carriers. Since that reading the headlines as Voice Plans are worthless so obviously wrong, I mentally defaulted to the next meaning of Voice: Google Voice.

Symbol overloading + linkbait title = FAIL

Know of another product by the name "Voice", in use by as many people? And people always seem to be bi-polar with Google Voice, some saying it's the best thing since toast, some saying it's pointless and they hate it.

It's time for carriers to understand that charging per minute or per message (even more ridiculous) are concepts of the past. It's all about data.

agreed..the next generation networks will carry voice as data packets itself so this had to happen sometime.However, I doubt how will this benefit the consumers as long as they are going to put caps on data usage.

Uh, has anybody here ever racked up $60 worth of mobile calls in a single month? That pretty much describes my pay-as-you-go fees for an entire year.

So, sure, if you pay them for more phone calls than you could ever possibly make, they'll let you make as many phone calls as you like.

This reads less like news and more like a placement by whichever carrier is offering this plan.

I'm in the UK, but yes I would rack up that bill easily in a month if I was on PAYG.

There was a case in Vancouver where Fido promoted unlimited calls. But in the fine print it said maximum 5000 minutes per month. A guy actually went over that, and he started getting additional charges. He didn't understand it of course, because he had purchased the unlimited package. All the other carriers jumped on the opportunity to say, "when we say unlimited, we mean unlimited." Of course, their unlimited was clearly restricted to weekends/evenings, but the point was made. Edit: the guy used his phone for both his personal life and for his personal business.

If you can't rack up $60 worth of calls in 1 month on PAYG, that's amazing.

Assume: 10 cents/minute

A budget of $60 gives you 600 minutes/month. That's 20 minutes/day in a 30-day month. If your cell phone is your only phone, like it is for me and for many others, it's very easy to breach 20 minutes/day. Especially if you have a significant other.

I just checked and I've spent almost exactly $60 on my pay-as-you go phone since mid-October. That comes to about $15 a month. I make no effort whatsoever to reduce my phone usage, other than the fact that I don't enjoy talking on the phone at all. I use AT&T, so I pay $1 a day when I use the phone and then it's 10 cents a minute for calls outside of the network. As it turns out, most of the people I talk to have iPhones, so I'm not getting charged the 10 cents per minute. I also buy the minimum amount of text messages every month (200 for $5). I've never used all of them and they roll over each month, so my current balance of text messages is about 475. This may not be for everyone, but it's working for me. My phone is also the 'dumbest' phone I could find. Cuique suum.

Actually I do rack up about that much here in London. Can't switch to a yearly plan since I won't be staying that long. And that's nothing compared to other bills :)

So basically AT&T is matching what Sprint already does. Meanwhile Sprint is busy raising its effective rates to match AT&T and Verizon. I love competition.

Here is to hoping as tech marches on some decent Android phones trickle down to prepaid. I'd like off the contract bandwagon please.

T-mobile has a month-to-month contract if you own your phone, you can discontinue at any time and it's $20 cheaper per month than a 2-year contract. Not prepaid, but no 2-year crap either.

Virgin Mobile, MetroPCS, and Cricket have some reasonably good phones and some awesome plans.

virgin mobile has an android phone and a $25/mo plan, but still not prepaid :(

Summarized: as tech advances, the same services become cheaper.

Add this article to the "no duh" category.

Actually, I'd summarize this as "data is the new SMS".

The difference being that data actually costs something to provide. SMS never did.

Oh come on. Smart phones in general still only make up a small percentage of the over all subscriber base for the big phone companies. The rest of their subscribers still burns through minutes and text messages every month.

I welcome the day where I can have data only phone plan with iphone.

Boner-kill: You have to be subscribed to their criminally-overpriced unlimited messaging plan to get down on the unlimited mobile calling. Had to screw it up somehow, huh AT&T?

Vodafone here in Australia offer unlimited calls and text (to any number) plus 1Gb data for $45/month

http://www.vodafone.com.au/personal/plans/infinite/index.htm

Pity their network sucks so badly right now, and has done so for the last 4 months or more.

Hopefully the fix up whatever they have broken trying to merge the Three and Voda networks.

As someone who has always hated talking on the phone, I agree.

As a network engineer on the voice team of a bank, I disagree.

Voice is not worthless. A more accurate headline would be "Dedicated voice plans on current-generation smartphones are becoming marginalized".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com