Rationale | Cell Phone Tracking Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Rationale’

CyanogenMod disables root access by default, now requires user configuration

Friday, March 16th, 2012

CyanogenMod disables root access by default, keeps it as an optionHoly crap! CyanogenMod, the custom ROM of choice for many power users, will no longer offer root access upon first install. Now before you panic, let’s make this part clear: everyone so inclined may still enable superuser access — for ADB, apps or both — from the Developer Options menu. The biggest change, in fact, is that CyanogenMod is making a significant departure from the majority of custom ROM developers, which offer root access to all users by default (and often without their knowledge). The move is an attempt by CyanogenMod leaders to make the platform more secure, and given the number of ROMs that are based on CyanogenMod (or glean its packages), we wouldn’t be particularly surprised to see this feature become more commonplace amongst other custom Android ROMs. To learn more about the rationale of the project leaders, be sure to hit up the source link below.

CyanogenMod disables root access by default, now requires user configuration originally appeared on Engadget on Fri, 16 Mar 2012 22:06:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink Phandroid  |  sourceCyanogenMod  | Email this | Comments

 Mail this post

AT&T should be investigated for ‘fraudulent’ data policies, public interest group says

Tuesday, February 28th, 2012

AT&T on Monday announced a new plan that will let developers pay for the data used by their apps and services. The data consumed by apps that make use of this new feature would not apply toward a user’s data cap. The new service was pitched as a way for content providers to ease customers’ growing concerns over wireless data usage, however one public interest group sees the feature as a slap in the face to AT&T subscribers. “This new plan is unfortunate because it shows how fraudulent the AT&T data cap is, and calls into question the whole rationale of the data caps,” Harold Feld, legal director of Public Knowledge, said in a statement. ”Apparently it has nothing to do with network management. It’s a tool to get more revenue from developers and customers.” Read on for more.

“The plan creates two new groups of customers and app developers — those who pay AT&T extra for the privilege of being exempt from the cap and those who don’t,” Feld continued. ”We are disappointed that the FCC has ignored the two requests we have made for the agency to investigate the need for both wireless and landline broadband caps. There is still no rationale for why they are needed, what the network costs are, how they are imposed and how many customers are subject to them.”

AT&T’s smartphone data policies have been called into question lately following a new wave of subscriber complaints. Loyal customers who retained their unlimited data plans after AT&T switched to a tiered system can continue to use an unlimited amount of data each month, but their data speeds are throttled — sometimes to nearly unusable speeds, according to a number of readers who have emailed BGR with tales of woe — if they are among the top 5% of data users in a billing period.

On a number of occasions, subscribers have seen their data speeds slowed after less than 2GB of usage in a single billing period. For the same $30 AT&T is charging unlimited data plan holders each month, however, smartphone users on a tiered data plan can enjoy up to 3GB of full-speed data.

“This is exactly the type of market manipulation we hoped the FCC’s Open Internet rules would prevent,” Feld added. “If the Commission does not believe it has the authority under those rules to investigate this practice, it should do so under its general authority over wireless services.”

 Mail this post

FCC unsatisfied and troubled by Verizon Wireless’ response regarding its ETF and $1.99 phantom data fee

Friday, December 25th, 2009

verizon-logo

In a scathing one page response, FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn cut Verizon Wireless to its knees by saying the answers the wireless carrier provided in response to the FCC’s investigation were “unsatisfying and, in some cases, troubling.” The commissioner chided Verizon for the fluctuating rationale behind its early termination fee, which has been expanded to include not only the cost of the device itself but operating and retail costs as well. She pointed out that high voice and data costs already subsidize these business costs and the fees levied, especially those at the end of a contract, are not in the public’s best interest. Clyburn further condemned Verizon by stating that she was “alarmed” by these $1.99 phantom data fees and that Verizon can not just bury its head in the sand and ignore this issue by saying it does not exist. The letter concludes with a stern reprimand reminding Verizon Wireless that they should be “focusing primarily on developing innovative products, maintaining affordable prices, and providing excellent customer service”. Hear that Big Red? Clyburn also promises to discuss this issue in greater depth with her colleagues next year. That water in which Verizon Wireless is standing just got a little bit hotter.

[Via DSL Reports]

Read [PDF]

 Mail this post

FCC questions Verizon Wireless about its new $350 early termination fee

Friday, December 4th, 2009

fcc-logoThe FCC has taken notice of Verizon Wireless’ new $350 early termination fee that applies to all advanced devices purchased after November 15th, 2009. The governmental agency sent an inquiry letter to Verizon Wireless asking them answer several questions regarding this increased fee. The questionnaire focuses on Verizon Wireless’ disclosure of the ETF to customers and the rationale behind the increase. The FCC also does the math and calculates that a customer with a $350 ETF will still have $120 fee remaining  after 23 months into a 24 month contract. It then asks the loaded question, “If the ETF is meant to recoup the wholesale cost of the phone over the life of the contract, why does a $120 ETF apply?” Verizon also gets hit up about the $1.99 fee it charges customers for inadvertently accessing the Mobile Web, and is asked to explain the terms and conditions of such access. Naughty, naughty Verizon has until December 17th to provide its answers.

[Via WSJ]

Read [PDF]

 Mail this post